Movies Books

Peter Travers has made his book "1,000 Best Movies on DVD" a "must have" for all avid TV movie viewers. It is easy to use, and a pleasure to read while reminding you of wonderful movies you have already seen and helping you select movies you will definitely want to see.

I bought this book because I wanted to take full advantage of online movie rental services. "1,000 Best Movies on DVD" is a great resource for selecting movies from the large libraries available from online service providers.

Give you ideas of things to watch that you may not have considered.

I have several other movie review books and they're all sitting on the shelf collecting dust. So I approached this book by Peter Travers with some reservation. Not to worry, this is the only movie review book that matters. Here's why:

1. Travers likes movies for the same reason you and I like movies. He's not trying to come across as a cinema professor. He clearly doesn't give a hoot about a film's rep with other critics - there are so called classic movies that aren't here and there are many others (e.g. Die Hard and Independence Day) that other critics would never include in a book of the best. When he uses terms such as "eye popping colors" and "gives your home theater system a real workout", it's clear that he likes movies like we like movies. Don't think for a second, though, that, based on those examples, this is oriented to modern action flicks. Every genre and every period is well represented. It's just that, for Mr. Travers, "good" doesn't HAVE to mean "old" or "foreign".
2. Unlike other books which critique at least 5000 movies (often much more), Travers has done the filtering and focuses only on what he considers to be the very best films, especially focusing on those that come across the best on DVD. I love that approach. Why waste ink and paper (and your time) to review crap like "Jaws 3" and "Nash Pluto"? By just focusing on the good stuff, Travers has a lot more space to explain why the movie is good. That makes every page in the book essential reading.
3. He has wisely avoided a star system which just gets readers upset wondering why their favorite movie didn't get more stars. It also doesn't try to put them in order from 1 (best) down to 1000. He clearly thinks all these movies are pretty terrific and, by simply listing them in alphabetical order, it encourages you to read about them all. That ends up putting a lot more DVDs on your "must watch" list than you otherwise would have.
4. Travers is a really entertaining writer, often quite funny too. These aren't cerebral pontifications, they come across as musings from a regular guy who happens to love movies. So that makes this more than just a reference book, it's one you really enjoy reading cover to cover.
5. He does an excellent job in explaining why a movie is worth watching. For that reason, you'll have a much better idea whether each movie is one that you really want to see. In many cases I could see why Travers was so impressed with the movie, but his detailed description made me realize it's just not my thing.

The worst thing you can do is dismiss a book like this on the basis of the movies he left out (or included). Face it, no two people are going to have the same views on 1000 movies so put the quibbling aside in advance. This book is not meant to be a list, it's meant to help the reader find great DVDs to buy or rent. After reading this, you're certain to have ticked off at least 150 DVDs that you really want to see. And you will have been greatly entertained in the process. What more could you want from a book of this type?

I loved this book and recommend it highly. My only caveat is to have some time set aside to read through it. I was up for hours and hours, reading his reviews of movies that I have already seen, remembering the highlights of great movies. I couldn't put it down. If you love movies, and if you love your DVD machine, this book is a match made in heaven. Buy it. Buy it now.

A GREAT read! It has specific movies and historical realizations I had never thought of!

This is a very interesting and useful book but I don't exactly like the overall point of view that it takes on motion pictures. It takes many historically based films and critiques them by comparing what is on the screen to actual historical events. Each chapter is devoted to one film (in most instances) and is critiqued by a different authority. The one constant that I see running throughout this book is that history does not make for good motion pictures if you are gazing through the eyes of the historian. That disturbs me. Motion pictures are a business as well a legitimate art form. If a historically based movie gets your interest as well as entertains you then perhaps that movie has fulfilled its purpose. The movie is the catalyst. It is up to you to dig up the history book and see what was recorded. And if you dig up a second history book it is very possible that those same events may be recorded slightly different. I liked the critique by Sean Wilentz on "THE BUCCANEER: Two Films" where he states that they stand somewhere in between fact and fiction. Akira Iriye is too critical of TORA! TORA! TORA! When you recall that particular motion picture, that's the one that stands out as a film that tried to get all the facts correct. Americans and Japanese respective of their home countries directed it. Iriye's criticism is almost ludicrous trying to state that inflections in the voices of some of the actors actually distorted the true meaning of their words. In light of PEARL HARBOR (2001) Akira Iriye is way off mark. Marshall De Bruhl's words about THE ALAMO are redundant and superficial. THE ALAMO was John Wayne's screen fulfillment of the legend. THE ALAMO is a great American film and it perpetuates that legend till this day. I liked what Stephen E. Ambrose had to say about THE LONGEST DAY. Ambrose recognizes that half the duality of filmmaking is a business. His approach and comments are very insightful and well written. As seen by James H. McPerson GLORY comes off best. It deserves it. "PAST IMPERFECT" is a good book but I just wish there were more input from the filmmakers.

When you're both a student of history and a movie buff, as I am, it can be difficult to sit and watch a film that presumes to have an accurate historical context without fighting the urge to evaluate it and pick holes in it. And I'm not the only one. This is a collection of analytical essays, most of high quality, by experts (not all of them historians) analyzing and critiquing individual films: Stephen Jay Gould on _Jurassic Park,_ Antonia Fraser on _Anne of the Thousand Days,_ Thomas Fleming on _1776,_ Dee Brown on _Fort Apache,_ William Manchester on _Young Winston,_ and numerous others. Sticking to those films about which I have some knowledge of the historical events they claim to portray, most are right on the money. James McPherson, commenting on _Glory,_ points out that while the context and general atmosphere are very well done, and the costuming and so on are exact, there are still deliberate historical errors for the sake of drama; none of the soldiers in Col. Shaw's 54th Massachusetts were ex-slaves, for instance, all of them having been recruited from among the state's free black population. And Catherine Clinton does an excellent job taking the wind out of _Gone with the Wind_'s mythical sails. There's a great deal of good information and criticism here and it's a compliment to say that nearly any of these essays will start an argument.

This book is just too damn interesting not to go into a revised edition that would, welcomingly, include a few more recent examples of the movies portending to convey history. It is cleverly organized, with an actual historical "timeline" that is matched with a selected movie that attempted to portray events for that period or year. It starts all the way back in the Jurrasic period, with "Jurrasic Park," of course. Each movie critique is written by a different film expert or historian, so you get a lot of diversity of perspective as well as writing style. There is a very intelligent interview of director John Sayles ("Eight Men Out" "Metowan") in the preface, which may be reason enough for film buffs to purchase this book.

One can either browse through the book and focus on "favorite" or "hated" films of the past, or read it straight through. Each essay offers at least one very good insight on the nature of history and how elusive the "accurate" accounting of an era or event can be.

The overall impression this book leaves is that movies, for all their ostensible efforts to "recreate" historical realities, will NEVER get it quite right. That's because they are products of their own times, and cannot ever fully escape the sensibilities of their own historical eras. Given this approach, the reader cannot help but gain a deeper appreciation for the exacting work of historians -- even if he or she is first attracted to the book out of interest in film. Films (and histories) explored here include "Spartacus," "Aguirre, Wrath of God," "Houdini" "Anne of a Thousand Days," "Henry V" (both Oliver and Branagh)"They Died With their Boots On", as well as many more. Since this book's publication, there have been more films that have either come close to, or completely mangled historical reality, so a revised edition would be most welomed. So to Mark Carnes, et al. -- PLEASE???

This book is commendable for its conception but is flawed in its premise and execution. The problem is there are too many fingers in the pie. I would have liked to read about one historian's perspective on all the films reviewed. Instead, each film was addressed and compared to historical recollections by a different author. There is no uniformity of thought or perspective. For instance, I am sure that if Stephen Ambrose had reviewed TORA! TORA! TORA! he may have seen that film in a much more favorable light than did Akira Iriye. One can speculate to infinitum. It is possible to find and read countless books on a given historical topic. The point I am making is that each author has the ability to bring different perspectives or interpretations of historical record that may result in different conclusions of events or more importantly ideas. If you were to ask an auditorium full of historians what was the most important factor contributing to the start of the Civil War I am sure you may get at least five good answers. Perhaps the idea that a film conveys is more important than the accuracy of each step that led to that idea. I think that SPARTACUS is an important film not as a representation of a historical record but for the idea that the inherent rights of human beings to live free is a notion worth dying for. Kirk Douglas as SPARTACUS stated something to the effect that he would never stand by and see two men battle and die just for the amusement of other men. There is something very noble about that statement and to the visuals on the screen that precipitated that assertion. To touch a chord of emotion from the audience is really the magic of the cinema. I never once ever thought that the purpose of the cinema was to teach history. For the audience the main purpose of the cinema is to be entertained and if you take it a few more steps perhaps come away with an idea or spark of imagination. That's the beauty of the cinema.

This is an excellent book for younger collectors who may not know about classic films. Also, I think it would make a good gift this holiday season, especially for those folks getting a new DVD player. The book was fun to read with lots of good information on collecting DVDs.

Normally, I would read DVD reviews found in the internet (as they are up-dated on a regular basis) as I collect both NTSC & PAL versions. However, I did pick up this book out of curiosity (probably due to the low price). Can't say that it's really outstanding but it is useful to some extend. The obvious advantage is its small size, thus you could bring it anyway & read it during your leisure.

For those serious DVD collectors, then this is a must buy. For me now, not only I'm colleting DVD movies but also any interesting DVD books!

With all these "Special Edition" "Extended Version" and "Director's Cut" DVD's floating around, this cheap little book is worth the money to anyone building a library of DVDs. What's on the three-disk Fellowship of the Rings that isn't on the original DVD release? Which version of Casablanca has the interview with the writers? Which 80-dollar "Special Edition" of the movie is the same old DVD but in a fancy box with a poster? The writers of this pocket guide have watched all the supplemental material and can tell you what's there. They're not afraid to tell you what's worthwhile and what's drivel. As a screenwriter and an author (Crafty Screenwriting), I like to watch my DVDs over and over. I'm glad I've added this book to my library.

I've been a film junkie all my life. And every year I avidly read every review and buy every book (of reviews) that I can lay my hands on. I consider myself such a serious fan of film that I read so many reviews I end up being a critic of critics. Vincent Canby and Janet Maslin (both from The New York Times) always won the award for the two people I could totally trust. I must now double that list and add Alida Brill and Steven Scheuer to that small circle of respected critical resources. This pocket guide puts an end to the silly idea of a collection of quickly created paragraph reviews (like just about every other dvd book) and instead focuses serious attention and commentary on about 180 must see movies. And it explains, quite thoroughly, why you will need to add quite a few titles to your collection. In their review of the classis "Do The Right Thing" they start by telling the truth: "this film grabs you by the first frame." And to that I must add THIS book (The Pocket Guide) grabs you on the first page. If you are a fan of film, buy a front row seat to this book and sign up for one-click shopping on Amazon and other sites... because your DVD collection is about to grow much bigger... and smartly so.

This is a really good book, and I do recommend it. This, and the Video Hound's Guide to DVDs series are the only ones I've found that describe and rate both the movie and the DVD, as most movie review books really only give capsule reviews of the movie and ignore the DVD extras. This book has in-depth reviews of 134 good movies and their DVD editions, whereas the Video Hound guides try to give a capsule review on a much larger set of DVDs. I think the reviews in this book are very good, and the information about DVD extras are even better.

However, there's one thing that I really didn't like about this book: It doesn't list any identifying information about the DVD, like the studio catalog number and / or UPC number. A number of the titles reviewed in this book have had several releases, and even though the review will mention which version to buy (at least by which studio released it), it's not always easy to pick it out of the review. They really should, at the very least, clearly list the catalog and UPC number of the versions they are reviewing at the beginning of the review (with recommended version if there is one), and ideally also use this information when they are comparing features of different releases of a title.

Please take note: The book has been updated in 2006 so the new edition includes significantly more movie analysis than the earlier copies. After giving a quick synopsis of "courtroom movies" of all kinds...including comedy...these two law professors discuss the legal issues raised by the films. For example: Did the lawyers use a correct basis for an appeal, what are the standards for expert witnesses, was the cross-examination proper, did the judge make legal error in failing to grant a motion to disqualify the jurors, did a lawyer make unethical statements in his closing argument, etc. Simply a terrific review of legal procedure for those who love the movies.

Narayan of Rebeccasreads highly recommends REEL JUSTICE as a great companion for the courtroom movie buff.

"Every third Hollywood movie is bound to be a courtroom drama/ legal thriller." Not 100% true -- every third movie every produced is bound to be one. The fascination with law, lawyers & courtrooms is not restricted to Hollywood -- it also holds true for Bollywood (Hindi movies) & Mollywood -- the Malayalam movie industry over here in Kerala, India -- where I'm from.

But how real are the concepts of law, courtroom & lawyers presented in movies? Through a finely selected collection of movies -- law professors & exponents in law & popular culture -- authors Paul Bergman & Michael Asimow explain where fact ends & fiction begins in some of the all-time classic movies from around the world.

Though I've seen many of the courtroom classics discussed in REEL JUSTICE, I'm off to pick up CDs of those I'd never heard of.

I've read the new and older edition. Both are great, though the newer edition is even more fun and informative. There's a new feature, 'Picturing Justice' that provides an analysis of how cinema art -- the direction, imagery and screenwriting -- can add an extra dimension to judicial themes. This is a welcom edition for any cinema or legal library. And it's pretty witty, as well.

Courtrooms are the scenes of many of our greatest dramas, both on film and in real life. So it's no surprise that a book reviewing the legal and dramatic merits of dozens of law-related movies is a great read.

You learn a lot about the law through the authors' explanations of what famous trial scenes in the movies were based in actual law or not. And you get lots of insights into the making of many excellent movies.

Not only did I enjoy this book enormously, I've also used it as a guide for what movies to rent.

As a lawyer, I did not expect that a book on movie trials, aimed at a popular audience, would have much substance. But I was very pleasantly suprised. The authors, two law professors, do an excellent job of pointing out the numerous errors Hollywood makes when it tries to depict a trial. (Most non-lawyers would be surprised, for example, to learn that *My Cousin Vinny* is much more realistic than *The Verdict.*) The authors' discussions go into real (but not tedious) depth about not only the errors in the way judges, lawyers, etc., behave on film, but also the mistakes scriptwriters make in creating tactics and legal theories for their characters. In addition, the authors helpfully explain what would (most likely) *really* happen in many filmed situations. Because the authors treat each movie at length, this is not an exhaustive filmography. However, all the biggies are here, and the book also contains usefully organized indexes. This would be a great selection for lawyers, film buffs, or anyone who has to serve on a jury.

In Revenant, Willow has a Chinese friend, which sets the scene for lots
of conflict with Chinese gangs, Chinese mythology, and allows for plenty of beatdowns by the Buffster.

Gang types, as opposed to demon types, don't mind spraying the lead
around, though, which can be a it of a problem when you don't run around packing heat yourself as a high school girl.

At first in "Revenant," it seems that the real world is suddenly intruding into the quiet little town of Sunnydale. As if being on the Hellmouth was not fun enough, a Chinese gang has hit town and is clearly trying to take over. But this is a Chinese gang that employs not only automatic weapons but also demons and a bit of good old fashioned Chinese magic. Mel Odom does a nice job of incorporating some elements of Chinese mysticism into the Buffy mythos and his characterization of the Slayer and her cohorts is certainly above average. The most interesting sub-plot involves the arrival of a beautiful martial-arts warrior, with whom Xander becomes hopelessly smitten. This is carried off well until the very end of the novel, at which point, following a hysterical exchange of apologies between Buffy and Xander, we suddenly jump ahead to the post mortem and are denied the actual farewell between the couple we have been rooting on throughout the story.

By the time I finished reading this Buffy the Vampire Slayer novel I kept thinking there was too much of one thing and not nearly enough of another. With all the weaponry the Chinese gang brings to town, you would have to think that somebody else besides Angel was going to be hit by all those hail of bullets (nice touch by Odom having Angel's face get messed up for a while in the story). Guns are a touchy item in the Buffy universe, where only the occasional vampire (Darla in "Angel" comes to mind) bothers to try and shoot it out with the Slayer. This is because it is awfully hard to get close enough to kick somebody in the chest when they are shooting an Uzi at you. That being said, I have to admit I was surprised that Mayor Wilkins was not more of a presence in the story. After all, Sunnydale is his town and has been for well over a century. Consequently, it very hard to believe he and the Dark Forces he serves would not do something about these invaders. Of course, this would open up the opportunity for some sort of temporary alliance, but at the very least the Mayor should be doing a lot more to defend his turf. Despite these caveats, "Revenant" is an above average Buffy novel and I will be interested to see what Odom comes up with the next time around.

A wonderful Buffy novel! The only fault I have found with it is that it begins very slowly. If you can make it to the middle of the book, be prepared to reap wonderful rewards. The plot is a bit confusing at times, but the action sequences are astoundingly good. Odom writes very discriptively and litterally paints pictures with words; at times they are very grusome pictures, which makes it even better. Many of the characters are well trained in martial arts and wear costumes reminiscent of the Anime genre, a real treat to read.

Continuing in the Buffy tradition, the author of this book adds things we've *never* seen in Sunnydale before to make the plot work. This happens all the time on the show, to the point where the characters even make fun of the fact ("I've lived in Sunnydale for a few years now, you know what I've never noticed? A big honkin' Castle" ~Buffy vs Dracula). In this book we get a large Asian community stuck smack dab in the middle of what until now has been what seems to be a mostly white community. If you can get past that, though, this is a great book!

I think Revenant is a top rate Buffy book. the mixture of Gang warfare and chinese magic clash spectacularly. But, what with me being a big Angel fan and all, I mostly like the way Angel gets to come out of Buffy's shadow in this "Buffy" season 3 based novel, & gets to shine on his own, with detailed accounts of his own encounters & search for clues.

Also, Xander's obssession with the mysterious swordswoman adds for light entertainment, just as Willow's encounters with Lok Rong at the Rong residence are frightening. Even Buffy's Mum gets in on the act, Planning the interception of a dragon statue.

With its Graphic action sequences & killer climax, no regular 'Buffy' reader should bypass this novel, no matter how big or small fan you are of the series.

The most action-oriented of all the Buffy books, though the fights are excellently written. The book is more slam-and-tussle than plot - the reviewer who equated it to anime was dead on the money - but, hey, nothing wrong with that. As with several of the Buffy books, this one has too many irons in the fire to satisfactorily resolve them all, but overall it is quite satisfying.

In a plot almost ripped out of the day's suppressed headlines, a Chinese power broker is shipping heavy arms to California street gangs. The ensuing chaos provides excellent cover for occult behind-the-scenes activities, keeping Buffy and Company distracted. Several out-of-town players get involved in the act, including a likeable Chinese warrior-woman who nearly fills the void in poor luckless-in-love Xander's sex-life.

Welcome additions in this entry are Mayor Wilkins and his faithful hench-vamp, Mr. Trick, but they are relegated to incidental roles when they should have been much bigger players in this plot. And where is Faith, for God's sake? One of the worst failings in the entire book series is the all but complete negation of one of Sunnydale's most notorious personages, Faith the Fallen.

A strong entry in the series, well-written. Most recommended for lovers of action and anime.

I found McBride's book to be a good time-killer for a movie buff (maybe to read while waiting in the doctor's office, or in-flight), yet definitely not a "must-read." My criticisms stem from what seemed to me as the author's constant tub-thumping of his own accomplishments throughout the book (that he knew Orson Welles, that he wrote a controversial review about "Patriot Games," that he was a screenwriter, etc.) and his repeated mention of different facts concerning the making and premiere of "Won Ton Ton, the Dog That Saved Hollywood," a film not even well-known enough to be considered a cult movie. That said, I found his opinions to be quite controversial and in some cases refreshing (after what we were subjected to in the '90's, I somewhat identify with his frustration concerning "Star Wars"). The cynicism with which he attacks some popular films may serve to distance him from the reader. But if you're an open-minded film lover looking for a pleasant diversion and can't locate anything by Danny Peary, I suggest you give it a try.

This is a response to "Reader from North Carolina July 7, 1999." Yes, the book is a compilation of Mr. McBride's opinions. Yes, it contains lists of movies. That is why it is called "The Book of Movie Lists: An Offbeat Provocative Collection of the Best and Worst of Everything in Movies." Since Joseph McBride is a well-respected film critic and biographer, I was anxious to learn which movies particularly delighted him and which did not. The book did not disappoint me. In fact, I found it delightful. It is filled with fresh insights and anecdotes about movies and it was the catalyst for many discussions among my friends.

This book was a joy to read. Loved it, and read it in one sitting. Anyone who loves movies and wants something different would love this book/. The lists were definitely offbeat, but that's what I liked about them. It was something different and very informative.

I thought this book was very original. It provided movie lists that were unique and offered something different from every other book on movies that I have read. It was a fun read.

I thought this book would be unique lists about movies based on facts. However, it's just a compiliation of Mr.McBride's offbeat opinions. He is entitled to his strange thoughts...I just wish I hadn't paid to read them!

Although Vito Russo (1946-1985) was well known as a gay activist and was extremely influential in the creation of such AIDS-activist organizations as ACT UP, today his reputation rests almost exclusively on THE CELLULOID CLOSET, a powerful commentary on the way Hollywood portrayed homosexuality on film from the silent era to the early 1980s. The book received considerable attention when first published in 1981, and it continues to receive considerable attention to this day--and justly so, for Russo's examination of the various gay characters created by Hollywood explores not only how such images were created by Hollywood, but how they shaped "straight" America's ideas about homosexuals and often altered the gay community's own self image as well.

The position Russo takes and the interpretations he offers are nothing short of fascinating, and THE CELLULOID CLOSET holds up extremely well to re-reading. Even so, it is essentially an excellent work by an amateur writer. For all the power of its interpretations and arguments, the text is badly structured, and too often the tone of the prose seems less about the films under consideration than about the personality that considers them. And there are frequent factual errors in the text, with Russo's comments on the cult favorite The Rocky Horror Show perhaps the most glaring case in point.

Although Russo's omnipresent personality tends to undercut his prose at times, it is an engaging personality, and in a certain sense it drives the narrative--and indeed does a great deal to make the book's shifting structure seem more acceptable than it would have otherwise been. And after a careful re-reading of the text, I have come to the conclusion that the errors involved are best described as "surface" errors; they do not seem to me to undercut the power of Russo's interpretations, arguments, or positions, all of which are extremely well presented and very astute. Even so, given the book's somewhat problematic nature, I would take issue with those who describe it as "definitive," which is a rather sweeping word. I would prefer to describe it as a fascinating analysis of a difficult subject written by a gifted amateur author--who manages to overcome his limitations to present an endlessly fascinating series of interpretations, arguments, and positions. The book deserves a place on the bookshelf of every one who loves film as much as the writer did, and I recommend it strongly. But it would be a mistake to take it as an absolute.

GFT, Amazon Reviewer

This is one of the very few books that has useful information on gays in cinema from the beginning of the film industry to (somewhat) present day. I used it as research for a writing project on homosexuals in film and it was probably the most useful source as a stepping stone of information. By current standards, some academics may say that this book is outdated and "overdone" however I consider it to be the best single source of information on gays in film to date. I question why there are so few other "popular" publications that branch out from the wonderful points and concepts that Vito Russo makes.

The movie "The Celluloid Closet" is great, but you
occasionally get the feeling that the directors
are straining to make a point about homosexuality
in old movies. But you never feel this way reading
Russo's book. Russo is not a gifted prose stylist,
the writing of the book is wel, it's prosaic, but
he's a good writer with a keen eye and an excellent
memory. If you've seen the movie and enjoyed it get this
book to complete the experience.

Russo, now deceased, published the first edition of this book in 1981, in the dark ages before queer independent cinema, and before mainstream cinema began the tradition of giving every female lead a gay man for a best buddy -- back when gay men appeared only as swishy queens or psychotic killers, and lesbians appeared only as psychotic killers, period. He exhumed hundreds of long-forgotten films, from moody German expressionism through the fluffy bedroom farces of the 1950's, and created an invaluable survey of the way movies look at gay people, comparable in scope to Donald Bogle's survey of African-Americans in film, "Toms, Coons, Mulattos, Mammies, and Bucks." We desperately need an update, but for everything from Laurel and Hardy shorts to "Personal Best," this is the place to go.

For me, this book answered many questions about why people, both gay and straight, have certain attitudes about homosexuality. The portrayal of gays in popular entertainment plays a gigantic role in how gay people are perceived, and this book gives many great examples of that.

It also points the way to plenty of interesting movies that deal, in one level or another, with the subject. It would never have occurred to me to rent "Victim" (the 1961 movie) or "Suddenly Last Summer" if it weren't for this book. (What can I say--I'm provincial.)

The newer addition includes some of the changes in the 80s. I wish that Vito Russo were still alive. The topic of gays in the movies is one that's still moving forward and backward at the same time, and it would be interesting to read his take on movies like "Beautiful Thing," and "Boys Don't Cry" as well as "To Wong Foo" and "Braveheart."

The book is interesting reading but not all that great. Enough said.

An informed and anecdotal account of the process of making indie films from the talented and accomplished Polish Brothers. However, it's a bit remedial and general for the initiated filmmaker. There are a couple of bonafide pearls of wisdom and the book moves right along, covering the process of making indies. Which makes it a fun read, but for my time and money there are much better books on independent filmmaking.

There are plenty of indie books out there, but this is the only one I've found which is comprehensive and made by real indie filmmakers. It's highly technical where it needs to be, like in the camera chapter, and easily understood throughout. My favorite chapters were distribution and writing as they illuminated the process in ways I hadn't fully understood previously. The book was a pleasure to read, I recommend.

I'm a big fan of this book. I live in Los Angeles, I'm very serious about pursuing a career in independent film, and I've read a great deal of ground-up Hollywood "making it" books. Some like "Rebel Without A Crew" were actually pretty inspiring and others like "Nuts and Bolts Filmmaking" were very helpful in terms of, well, the nuts and bolts of filmmaking.
But no book I read really addressed the "big picture"- why people make independent films, and how they go about making independent films. This book was admirably neither bogged down in self-congratulation or in tiny, picky details.
The Polish Bros and Sheldon started from the ground up and guide you pretty much step-by-step through the indie filmmaking process, and it was great to get their advice based directly on their own experiences, with concrete examples.
The book doesn't offer anybody any false hope, but at the same time it's pretty damn inspirational. It offers the notion that you CAN have a different and original filmmaking vision AND successfully translate that to the screen. Through hard work and cleverness, the Polish Bros and Sheldon succeeded in making daring and thoughtful films outside of the conventional Hollywood model, and you, perhaps, can too.
I read this book at the right time, and it made a huge impact on me. It gave me both hope and cold-shower, practical advice. I'd definitely recommend this book for anyone interested in independent film.

This book is a great read for any emerging or established filmmaker. It provides an interesting and intimate story of two brothers struggle to make independent feature films. Throughout retelling their journey the brothers pass on useful knowledge, tips and allow the reader to learn from their mistakes. This book gets right down to specific problems on and off set and exactly how they dealt with them and the results... it has a refreshing straight-to-the-point style of writing, and taught me a few things about the Hollywood system that I didn't know. This book will inspire you to work harder and wiser to get your films made.

This guy is the best flash artist ever! I didnt read the book but I saw his work! go to biteycastle.com to see his work!

This book is full of uninspiring projects and poor editing. Tons of typos, and writing that just doesn't make sense in the least. I'm very surprised someone edited this at all.

It was up for sale again not long after I got it.

i fenk tihs bok is so kool 4 sk00l i giv fiev starz cos it iz good.

i aelso fink flash iz fuhn + awsum x 9

<3 (osupsons)

- mucks

Adam Phillip's chapter stands out in this valuable book. Finally, advice from a real professional(Disney) animator. Well respected as a character, special effects and Flash animator, Adam's advice is invaluable to anyone seeking to animate in Flash.

This book has got eight chapters in it, and I've been through four of them so far and am really enjoying it. I bought it because WideGroup wrote one of the chapters and I saw the Sofake site on FlashKit featured site. It's great to see how their Flash files are built and yuou can get all the files for the book on the web site. I made the MP3 player which is great as I've been looking around for tutorials that show you how to do this in Flash MX for ages.

This is one of the least enjoyable books on films you will ever come across. Totally dry and bland, Haskell just runs through women's history in motion pictures with thumbnail descriptions of classic films and the like, never really giving us the essence of any major female stars or even good analysis on specific films. Don't take my word for it - check it out at the library and read it for yourself. Bet you don't finish it!!

Along with Susan Douglas's work, Growing Up Female in the Mass Media, this book is one of the most honest and clearly organized arguments about the way women are depicted in film. For anyone who wants to see what women are screaming about...this book will wake you up. Haskell does a fascinating job of expressing (and cleverly) what has been done to women in the media...how they've been portrayed and how they've been made to be prostrate creatures in film. If you buy it, you'll obsessively begin to notice how true this stuff is on your television set, in your films...everywhere in our society!

--there is absolutely nothing polemical or fanatical about this book, which is for film lovers--not just feminists. It is one of the best books on FILM (not just women in film) I've ever read, up there with Stanley Cavell's "Pursuits of Happiness," but much more direct and down-to-earth. Haskell is a fiercely smart, wickedly funny, and casually erudite critic with many extremely sharp observations. She's arguably both a better belles lettresist and a better critic than her (I believe???) one-time husband Andrew Sarris, a better-known and more prolific film critic. It's also hard to argue with her basic thesis: that the portrayal of women in film was better, not worse, in the studio era and prior to the sexual revolution--although this stands received film and feminist history alike on their heads. Haskell is a rare marvel and model: a feminist aesthete who is able to put art before politics without denigrating the importance of the latter. Unlike, say, Camille Paglia, she neither denies nor quasi-celebrates the misogyny of great or simply entertaining films, yet neither does she make political correctness a criterion of artistic achievement or see misogyny where none exists. On the contrary, some of the best passages of the book are accounts of the strong and complex female characters of directors such as Josef von Sternberg, Karl-Theodor Dreyer, and Howard Hawks, among others. A totally engaging blend of classical liberalism and belles lettres/punchy journalism.

I was in the 11th grade at the time and I was just getting immersed in my fascination with movies and film theory. I read every book I could find on film studies.

That is when I stumbled upon this book (first edition) in my school's library. After reading this book, I never looked at the history of films, film themes, etc. in quite the same way.

As the years went by, I had read other film theory books that dealt with femininity and feminist thought, but this one always remained my favorite. So when the opportunity presented itself where I could add this book to my personal film library I was more than glad to.

I think I like this book so much because it introduced me to a series of films that while important in the women's studies and cinema may have been forgotten in the annuls of overall film theory and criticism. One outstanding example is "Letter from an Unknown Woman." The depth with which Ms. Haskell discusses this film immediately made me want to go out and see the film; and indeed I did.

I highly recommend this book not just to read but as an addition to any film lovers' library.

Molly Haskell describes herself in the introduction of FROM REVERENCE TO RAPE as a film critic first, and only secondly as a feminist. She even remarks negatively on an article about the movie HUSBANDS that Betty Friedan wrote for the New York Times in 1971, saying that Ms. Friedan just used the movie to extrapolate on her basic message in THE FEMININE MYSTIQUE. Having said that, she goes through the decades of film from the silent pictures through to the eighties, and concludes that the basic use of film towards women has been to keep them happily in their place: that is, married, and at home and out of the workplace. She organizes the book chronologically and details the evolution of women both in the industry as writers, actresses and directors. She surprises us with the news that in the beginning, there were many women directors, and only as the industry blossomed did men enter the business and push the women out. Women, however, have had more luck in the film industry than in any other, she maintains, since writing, editing, costume design and especially acting, could be done without sheer physical strength being required. The power denied most women, derived from high incomes, was given in abundance to Hollywood movie stars and successful screenwriters such as Francis Marion, who earned $150,000 per year in the 1930's! Actresses, who played the classic roles of compliant wives and mothers for the most part, had power in their real lives that cost them dearly in their personal relationships. Read the book to find out how the irony of real life personal power clashed with the image of womanhood portrayed on the screen, and how woman's place has changed and how films are changing along with them. Don't be afraid to keep your dictionary alongside; Ms. Haskell's vocabulary is formidable.