Movies Books

This book is an excellent idea. However, the authors left out what I have found to be the best one for our sons AND OUR DAUGHTERS. Add the book, "West Point" by Norman Thomas Remick to your list (in fact, this should be first as it gives the basics). It's a veritable education in character and leadership.

A wonderful list. Yes, as other reviewers point out, there is 'nothing new here'. But parents today are bombarded with books and videos for kids and don't often have time to sift through them all as thoughtfully as the authors have done here. They've done a wonderful job of reviewing stories we know and love from a boy's perspective. My 6 year old gets way too much pressure to act like a girl, I'm grateful for movie & book reviews that acknowledge not just that it's ok to be a boy, but actually quite wonderful. The discussion questions may not be the ones you want to ask, but they get you thinking along the right lines.

I find this book useful in choosing movies for my son and in pulling out character building topics to discuss with him. This book acknowledges that boys connect with media and gives specific ideas how parents can USE that power rather than simply be subject to it. I do have to agree with the other reviewers, I'd like to see more; a little more depth and an updated version to include more recent books and movies.

I love Amazon's Search Inside the Book feature but in this case is it doing the author any favors when it lists most of the books (listed by age group) which he suggests are appropriate? If you can see the books and movies, why buy the book?

ALso, just by glancing over the contents I could see which movies would work for my kids and which they'd seen or didn't like. This was enough to convince me that the book had nothing new to say to me that I hadn't already seen by using this feature.

Sorry. But that's my take.

This book has great age-appropriate movie and book suggestions. The topics of discussion have been very useful for us... our 5 year old son now specfically asks us to pause the movie or book so that he can get clarification regarding the concepts or words he does not understand. On the inside cover, I jot down the newer books or movies that strike me as being potentially inspiring for my son in the future. I REALLY wish Mr. Gurian would write a version of this book for girls! I have had to start my own list for my daughter.

When I first picked up this book I was expecting a cursory explanation of movies such as "Five" or "On the Beach," each film accompanied by a long-winded explication of the movie's social relevance and dull political analysis. To say I was pleasantly surprised upon reading this book is, to say the least, putting it mildly.

Newman covers the phenomenon of end-of-the-world films with a zest and a writing style rarely seen in works such as this. He deftly traces the genesis of the movies back to their ancestors in literature, even citing Mary Shelley's "The Last Man," her second science-fiction novel. (It was written in 1826 and is about a plague that destroys mankind.) It takes a thorough knowledge of the subject-matter to be able to speak of Mary Shelley in the same breath as Roger Corman. And it takes a thoroughly facile writing style to keep us interested until the back cover. Fortunately, Newman possesses both.

And did I mention Roger Corman? Yes I did, and this is what makes the book such a delight. Newman covers all end-of-the-world movies, noting correctly that the world does not necessarily have to end; the threat is enough. Whether it's "The Thing From Another World," or the ants of "Them," or even the paper-mache crabs of Corman's "Attack of the Crab Monsters," each film gets its due in Newman's pages.

So for those who wiled away a Saturday afternoon watching Godzilla save Tokyo from yet another guy in a monster suit, remember: you weren't just watching a Grade-Z movie, you were watching an apocalypse movie.

Kim Newman's Apocalypse Movies (End of the World Cinema) is actually broader than the title implies as it covers all forms of threats to humanity over the decades in cinema. It is a fascinating, well-researched account that lets the author roam freely and entertainly over the horror and science fiction cinematic landscape. This book will have the reader running to the video store in order to spend many hours sitting in the dark watching (or more likely) re-watching much schlock (glorious, glorious shlock) with a new perspective and an ability to put these tarnished gems in their broader context. A wonderful read for film buffs or those who would like to become one.

To appreciate this book you must have enjoyed watching either giant insects (of any sort) or a zombie-like person stumbling after someone with a delicious brain. If either of these concepts sound like a bad idea for cinema, this book may not be for you. Kim Newman's Apocalypse Movies (End of the World Cinema) is a joy to read as he takes the reader through a rogue's gallery of weird charaters while charting the science fiction and horror movies that have signaled mankind's doom since cinema began. The book is well researched, nicely written and much fun. These joyous films will be presented to the reader in a new and larger context that will only deepen their delightfully guilty pleasure. A wonderful book.

That is about it. This book contains more movie names and pictures than you would get in 10 of them there movie magazines.

However the writing is more of a rattling with a few names dropped now and then to try to keep it coherent. There are a few tidbits of history and biography with no real backup information and the author is strongly opinionated.

If you already know the movie then you can find this interesting as memorabilia and the pictures are fun for reminiscing. However, if you have not already seen the movie, at best this book will give you some titles to look-up. There the author has no time or inclination to really explain much as the next sentence must be reserved for another movie or two.

There is a small three-page bibliography that does not contain any ISBN numbers.

There is an extensive index to help handle the volume of titles. I looked-up "Them!" and got several references that were half sentences talking about something else and said like in the movie "Them!."

Again the black and white stills from the movies are worth while.

A misleading title. Most of the movies listed here are NOT "apocalypse" films. There is also very little analysis. A pretty book with little substance. Poor.

I loved this book :) Since this is the last book with Prue in it, she plays a big part *which is nice* The plot was well-thought out... Miss Gallagher had the personalities of the Halliwells down. Plus, a little background info on when Phoebe was in New York. I highly recommend all the books written by this author. She's one of the best ones out there.

It's a shame that more books weren't written with Prue though :(

this story has a good premise. an invisible demon comes to
town and starts granting people's wishes. the only problem
is that he twists it so that it comes out as a disaster.
pheobe is being overloaded with visions of people in trouble
and it is virtually driving her insande haveing 6 or 7 visions
a day, with some as minor as a person getting a paper cut. the
charmed ones must find a way to stop this demon before they make
the mistake of wishing the wrong thing and having their lives turned upside down. will they do it? or will pheobe go insane?
oh you will just have to go and read the book.

as this is prues last book im glad she had a major role and that she save the day as it's a good way to end it. as a big charmed fan i think that the more recent book focus a little to much on the new character paige whereas in the earlier books the main focus was more spread about. so this book is a must have for all fans

I read this book and to tell you the truth it was boring. Well for me! No offence people who like it. I've read all the other charmed books and I think there were better books than this one! I think the author needs to get to the point faster. Well I don't now but that's just me! ...

This book is soo popular! It also gets very confusing. The book gives you wonder as to whether or not "The Charmed Ones" can beat whatever is threatening them. Not to mention some facts about Phoebe's past life in New York. The evil they will fight isn't a warlock or demon. It's something that they never crossed before, and probably none of their ancestors did either!

I haaven't quite finished the book yet, but it so far is quite interesting. What disappoints me, is that the characters in the book don't connect very well to the characters the show has created. And in the show, no one hardly ever cusses. I am on page 64 and there have already been way too many cuss words......there are more in the first 60 pages than there is in the whole CSI:Miami series!!!! I am going to finish the book and hopefully I won't be disappointed.

One of my favorite CSI: MIAMI reads! When the leaders of a number of gangs in Miami start dying, it's up to Horatio and the CSI crew to figure out who's behind the deaths -- and the answer will surprise you! Another great, quick CSI read.

First of all, I really like the CSI series, even though I'm a bit concerned about how many spin-offs they'll produce. When I first looked into the novels and graphic novels, I was quite eager, since so much of the things I like about the series are to be found there. Yet, as I went through most of these books, most of them by Collins, I found again and again certain mistakes in the conclusions. As in this one, and not to spoil too much, additional information about an unknown DNA sample - the person is African-American - gets without any reason or explanaition conveniently transferred onto another unknown DNA sample, making a crucial connection. When I read that, I was stopped reading right there, went back in the book to check, then checked it again, but it still didn't add up.

I guess, it's possible that maybe I didn't understand everything right, or skipped these ultimately essential details. If that is so, and someone reads this and knows, please post something here and tell me. Otherwise, mistakes like that ruin the otherwise enjoyable reading experience

I think Max Allan Collins has much more a feel of the Miami characters than he does for the Vegas ones. This book is very well written, and is very true to the series.

I have become a fan a Collins' CSI books. This one is by far the weakest of the lot. The plot is extremely far-fetched and not written in a way to make it at all believable. The ending is both predictable and laughable.

I was also disappointed in the character development. What has impressed me with Collins' other CSI books is the way he is able to further develop the characters that the television series has brought to life. He does nothing to add to any of the characters in this book and does little to show the personalities that the television series has developed.

I do recommend reading Collins' other CSI books if you enjoy either of the CSI television shows (or even to read them if you are not a fan of the shows because the books are decent stand-alone reads). But this one can be missed. It does not even come close to living up the standards set in his other books.

Amazing...
That's a one word description for Bryan Michael Stoller's book.

I was born and raised in *Hollywood, CA* yet I had no idea how much detail went into Filmmaking. I was literally just another one of the "DUMMIES" that truly needed someone to S-P-E-L-L out how it's done.

The very first page (Cheat Sheet) was where I found a common ground that most everyone can relate to, "A Recipe for Filmmaking: Cooking with Your Production Team." From that page forward, I began really enjoying reading this book. Everyone loves a good meal but most don't consider exactly how much work goes into it and who does what to bring it to the table.

I started looking at the important notations and through Mr. Stoller's voice, I was gaining a better understanding of Filmmaking. Absorbing little bits of information at a time, until I realized that in my own natural tendency to verify information given (checks and balances) by skipping back and forth through different chapters in this book was to make sure what I was reading would all "add up."

Guess what?
Everything does!

My reason for buying this book was to gain the benefit of Mr. Stoller's years of experience and to learn how to make a film. I now have a good reference book (or tool) to guide me through the process.

My heartfelt thanks to you, Mr. Stoller~You are AMAZING!~as is the book.

This is a great book. A little too long for my taste, but it covers all subjects in general in the filmmaking business. I will recommend it to anyone who wants to have a big picture of the hole filmmaking process.

Good overall reference for filmmaking, for the beginner. For the experienced, good reminder of the basics that one might have forgotten.

I recommend this book to anyone who doesn't read in a linear sequence. I tend to skip around in books to get the info I need and the way this book is formatted, it allows me to effeciently get the answers I want without any missed beats. Stoller effectively breaks down every aspect, from pre, principal photography, budget breakdown, contracting, scouting, editing, post to distribution and much more. For filmmakers, no matter what your budget or title(s), this book saves you money, time and a lot of guessing. Thank you Bryan Stoller!

The book is very helpful. It brings a lot of good information for new filmmakers. You can find tricks, terminologies, tips, techniques, and more to start your career as a new filmaker. There are many good material to learn. The author uses recent movies as examples. It covers many aspects of the filmmaking industry and how to make a low budget film. Beside, the book brings a lot of links to interesting web pages related with the filmaking industry.

Santa only knows, someone should write a decent overview of holiday movies, but this tome isn't it. Awkwardly arranged, filled with typos, poorly written (and seemingly not edited at all) and, perhaps worst of all, very narrow minded, this book is a huge disappointment. The authors reveal not only a sensibility so mainstream as to accept poor films because they "work," but there is an obvious moral compass applied to their criticism (allusions to sex or any profanity automatically make a film bad).
The Svehlas go into ridiculously superfluous detail in delineating the plots of these movies (while giving barely any historical background), then tack on ham handed critiques at the end. They obviously have a great deal of affection for the holidays and Hollywood, but passion isn't enough to make this a good book.

Every year during the holidays we curl up in front of the TV to watch our holiday favorites. But with so many holiday movies turning up, it's difficult to remember our faves! This book helps us remember our favorites and reminds us to make sure to set aside time to see them.

I really enjoyed this book. It contains all of my favorite Christmas movies. Plus, it contained some movies I had never heard of. Based on the reviews, I have been checking out these unheard of movies (at least for me). I found 2 movies and were able to see them on TCM or AMC. They were Christmas in Connecticut with Barbara Stanwyck (she was wonderful) and Bachelor Mother with Ginger Rogers (she didn't need Fred) and David Niven. These were truly delightful movies and I would never have thought to watch them without the book. I pull out the book around Thanksgiving (I guess I'll have to pull it out even earlier now that Christmas promotions are starting in September!) and check the TCM and AMC website to see if any of the movies I'm interested in are playing. If you want a good reference source for your holiday viewing, this book is for you. It has great pictures, too!

In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I've contributed a scattered word or two to "It's Christmas Time at the Movies." So have a good many other writers, all of whom drop all highfalutin' film-critic baggage for the occasion and revel wholeheartedly in the opportunity to reminisce about many favorite (and some not-so-favorite) Yuletide pictures.

That's the beauty of the book, which at once attempts a near-comprehensive inventory and then encourages its commentators to write from the heart.

In December of 2001, I turned over one of our Fort Worth Film Festival auditoriums to a resurrection of the 1954 "White Christmas," which is arguably the centerpiece of "It's Christmas Time at the Movies." The showing sold out some 300 seats, and everybody seemed thoroughly well attuned to the film's message of common decency, camaraderie and good humor in the face of disappointment. Several of the audience members brought along copies of "It's Christmas Time at the Movies," if only to demonstrate their devotion to the main attraction.

Just goes to show you how profoundly many of these season-specific movies have touched the Heartland Audience, and how this savvy book's refusal to reduce Christmas-movie commentary to eggheaded Cultural Analysis has established it as a treasure among the only audience that matters. The entire point is to take Film Appreciation down from the Ivory Tower and make it accessible to the mass audience -- something that Midnight Marquee Press has managed to accomplish across the board, with a lengthy track record and a hefty résumé of titles to prove it.

I love this book. It is filled with my favorite Christmas movies. It was completely revised in 2003, so those nasty negative reviews have nothing to do with the new version, although I have the earlier version also and found no such problems as they stated. I've given this book many times as a Christmas present to the movie lovers on my list and every one has loved it! I can't tell you how much I enjoy reading about my favorite holiday movies like Holiday Inn, Christmas Vacation, and A Christmas Story. And the White Christmas write up is so emotional, it brought tears to my eyes. If you love Christmas movies, you'll love this book!

'The Longest Night Vol. 1' Is a fantastic collection of short stories written by some of the best Buffy & Angel writers in the league. Whilst I am not usually a big fan of short stories, these each had properly developed plots and dealt with the problems in true Angel tradition, and in doing so, sticks closely to the format of the show.
My favorite was 'The Anchoress' written by B&A regular, Nancy Holder in which the gang are drawn into ancient England, the land of the Druids. But this is only one of many that had me intrigued and unable to put the book down.
I definately recommend this book to any true fan of the series.

Conceptually, it's a nice idea: a series of short stories, taking place all on the same night. However, by creating such an idea, the editor set up expectations that aren't followed through.

In publishing, there are two ways to present short stories. The first is a simple short story collection, such as the Tales of the Slayer volumes. The other way is through "braided novels", such as I, Robot (and what The Longest Night seems to be). These consist of stories that, while seemingly disparate, tie together to tell a more cohesive story.

When reading the description for The Longest Night, I expected the volume to be similar to 24: to tell a story, or an arc, through multiple (mostly) standalone stories, all in quick succession. However, there is nothing to tie these stories together, no common framework (not even what you would see in a braided novel).

While taken alone, these stories range from acceptable to great, together they seem forced. In fact, few of the stories have anything to do with the Winter Soltice (the longest night of the year; hence the title). The Longest Night would have been better served to be a standalone collection, with each author free to use their own timeframe, rather than this incredulous mishmash.

i picked this book up just shortly after christmas with some leftover christmas money, i was pleasantly suprised by how good this book was. i have read all the other angel books in the series and this is by far one of the best. i enjoyed that it was short stories not one long, continuous story, after all, it is over 400 pages long. i would definitley recommed this book to an angel fan.

There really isn't much to say about The Longest Night except that I enjoyed it.

The Longest Night contains several short stories, each taking place within a one-hour time slot. Angel and the gang encounter ghosts, ice monsters, and last-minute shopping traffic. Each story is entertaining in its own way, some more so than others.

"The House Where Death Stood Still" is a wonderful opening story written by newcomer Pierce Askegren about a missing boy and his supposedly-dead father who is making phone calls to his ex-wife. Very creepy, and also very well told. "A Joyful Noise," written by veteran author Jeff Mariotte, features the return of many characters that we haven't heard from in a while (including a certain billionaire who can't seem to act his age and a certain ex-girlfriend who can't handle the dangerous life of demon-fighting, among others).

My favorite stories are "I Still Believe" and "Generous Presence." The former, written by Christopher Golden, tells about Angel and Cordelia going shopping for the gang; Angel doesn't have any ideas what to get them, so Cordy is there to help. The two run into trouble on the way, inevitably. "Generous Presence" (by Yvonne Navarro) occupies the 12 a.m. time slot, and it involves everyone at Angel Investigations getting gifts from Lilah Morgan at Wolfram & Hart. It seems like Lilah is just getting into the holiday spirit, but the gifts tend to show "what you're really worth."

Really, The Longest Night doesn't have many low points. Some stories seem outgraeous and unlikely to only take place in one hour. For example, in "The Anchoress" the gang time-travels to stop druids from performing a ritual, escape death, and return... all in one hour? And some of the stories don't gel with others: a holiday party takes place early on in the novel, but there is no mention of it anytime later. However, these things can be easily overlooked while you're actually reading... the stories are so well written, you tend to get completely engrossed in them.

I am not much of a fan of short stories as a rule, but I'm also not one to skip a new Angel book because of a personal prejudice. Right now Angel is getting better writing than Buffy is and this set of short stories is full of both old-timers who made both series a success and newcomers who have come to their own with the Angel startup.

The overall story arc that binds this made-for-Christmas volume together isn't really Christmas, but the Winter Solstice that precedes it - a much older sacred day than the one we celebrate now. This solstice is the longest night of the year and hence offers the most opportunity for badness. That plus its special nature as a magical day means that this is truly Angel Investigations' busiest day of the year. And as Cordelia would be quick to point out, their least profitable as well.

The book contains 12 stories set from 6:00 PM to 5:00 AM, written by 9 different authors from very old-timer Christopher Golden to complete newbie Pierce Askegren. With a certain amount of cheating, the editors have actually forced the tales to fit in a 12 hour span, but don't look for perfect timing. Almost all are written to a consistently high standard, and certain standing themes are developed evenly throughout. Like Angel's sense of isolation, echoed by Cordelia's internal struggles with her own lot.

The one story that bothered me a bit was Nancy Holder's 'Have Gunn, Will Travel.' In reading it, I kept thinking that she felt quite awkward with Gunn. Which is the case, since Holder has little direct experience with the uniquely Angel characters. Other than that, from Askegren's tale of a father's love gone comepletely awry to Christie Golden's finishing tour-de-force these are completely enjoyable. Since this is marked Volume One, we can look forward to another effort next year.

I own this autograghed book about the movies and the movie stars. What was most interesting to me was Nick's near stardom of his own. He had a very mature voice and looked almost exactly like his son George. 'course I like his white hair. I used to listen to him early every morning on Cicinnati Radio. I miss you, Nick, old friend.

This is a marvelous book written by a fabulous guy. He told me the film which changed him was FRANKENSTEIN! But I really think he was pulling my leg a little. In case he was really telling me the truth, I'd suggest he see VAN HELSING. This is a good addition to anyone's library if he has the slightest interest in the film world. Nick had insider information and a life-long interest in movies. After all, his sister Rosemary made many films, as has his son George.

The choices made for this publication were excellent and the accompanying photos added to Nick's commentary. The movie he looked for in vain has been written several times. At least,it seems like I've seen that storyline in more than one film through the years. His personal story of growing up as he did (similar to Civil War times) has been portrayed, but I'd love to see his version put on the big screen. Now that his son, George, is a producer and director, perhaps he could do the script as well and show his dad and two sisters as they were in childhood. All Nick Clooney fans would mob the theater to see the old days.

I miss Nick on the radio. Whatever happened to his Marine Sgt.? Whatever was his name? The same as a popular rock music singer.

After hearing the NPR piece about this book, I thought that it had great potential, and my friends and I actually began a movie series to watch all 20 movies on his list. We bought the book to encourage conversation about each work. Unfortunately, Clooney writes poorly and seems more interested in writing about the studios (and their heads) than about the actual impact the movies may have had on the U.S. Other than one or two short paragraphs directly relating to each movie, Clooney rambles on about other, uninteresting topics. It's painful to read. He tries to wrap up each chapter with a momentous sentence, which only ends up seeming hyperbolic.

In addition, this book ought to have been edited more carefully. Clooney roams from topic to topic, without any understandable reason, and there are some egregious errors (e.g. the synopsis for "The Great Dictator" is incorrect). Practically every film has to do with war, and I'm hard-pressed to believe that they are the only ones that impacted our culture. It is also surprising that his list contains nine movies from the '30s and '40s, but only one from the past 25 years.

Underneath it all, there may be some merit to his choices, but the book certainly doesn't help understand why. I learned more from reading the reviews on IMdB.com.

For me to say that Nick Clooney is a skilled, authorative writer, is to say nothing in as much as that is his main occupation, and he certainly doesn't need my approval to keep doing what he seems to have a gift for.It seems meaningless to comment on his choice of subject matter by acknowledging the years he spent hosting a TV production relating to just that subject. However to state that on picking up the book, opening it randomly, and not being able to put it down for two chapters might give you an indication of his ability to captivate the reader. The easy flow of the narrative was as though he was sitting there telling you the story in person. The last time I was so absorbed by a book, It was written by his sister, Rosemary (Girl Singer). Perhaps it's in the genes.

Few movie fans will dispute Nick Clooney's underlying point: That some movies change the way we, the audience, looks at the world. A wonderful book could be written around that idea, each chapter tracing the impact of a different movie. _Movies That Changed Us_ is, unfortunately, not that book.

Clooney's grasp of historical context--or, to be charitable, his presentation of it--is too narrow and too shallow to do justice to the points he's trying to make. If you're going to make the case that a movie "changed us" you have to be able to draw the Before and After pictures in convincing detail. You also have to be able to show that the movie itself was a catalyst for change . . . not just an indicator of larger forces that actually brought the change about. Clooney (especially when writing about changes outside of the movie business) frequently fails to do this,

The chapter on _The Graduate_ suggests that Clooney recognizes this problem. He argues that the movie (with its jaded view of romance, sex, marriage, and social norms) "killed the romantic comedy." It's an interesting argument, but what if the same shift in attitude that made _The Graduate_ incomprehensible to the middle-aged parents of 1967 made the romantic comedies of the 1930s, 40s, and 50s incomprehensible to their kids? Clooney never even considers the possibility.

The same problem sinks the chapter on _The Big Parade_, one of a cluster of films from the twenties and early thirties that painted war as bleak, unheroic, and tragic. Clooney credits such films with making the West slow to move against Hitler . . . but couldn't the too-fresh memories of 10 million young lives lost in a pointless war have been behind *both* the films and the hesitancy to go to war again? Clooney never stops to ask.

The book also suffers from sins of omission: Connections that seem so obvious and important you can't imagine why Clooney doesn't mention them. Why argue that the "Omaha Beach" scene in _Saving Private Ryan_ is powerful because of its realism, and *not* contrast it with the far more "Hollywood" battle scenes later in the picture? Why spend a chapter on the 1964 anti-war movie_Dr. Strangelove_ and not connect it to the nuclear-disarmarment movement that had been gaining strength since 1946? Why write about the impact of _Star Wars_ and talk only about computer-controlled cameras . . . not the "summer blockbuster" category that it (and _Jaws_) more or less created?

I study and write about popular culture for a living, but when I bought this book I *wasn't* expecting a scholarly tome. I was looking for something entertaining and thought-provoking to read at lunch . . . unfortunately, it isn't even a good lunchtime book.

A Great read. As entertaining as is is informative, this is one of the better books on producing that I have read. The book is broken down in the same way a producer goes about putting together a project. From conception to birth, this covers it all. Many great stories and personalities are covered (esp. good is the section on the Untouchables and not being able to get David Mamet to write anymore because he was off working on his own film House of Games). Pick this one up and enjoy.

I have read this book and one by Lydia Obst ("Hello, He Lied"). I preferred the Linson by a mile - Obst is too full of herself (she even disses Linson!). Linson discusses the role of producer and his contribution to films such as "Car Wash" and "The Untouchables". There's a revelatory look at a film he worked on the DIDN'T get made, called "Arrive Alive". Highly recommended for anyone with an interest in the process of motion picture production.

I saw bits and pieces of an interview with Linson on the new FAST TIMES AT RIDGEMONT HIGH DVD and when I found out he had a book out I decided to check it out. He's been involved as a producer with some of my favorite movies (HEAT, THE UNTOUCHABLES, FIGHT CLUB). This was a quick and enjoyable read. You'll learn a little about what a producer does. What I gleaned from the book was that a producer:

A) Brings the elements (writer, director, cast) together
B) Pitches the project to the studio and helps secure financing
C) Greases the gears to keep a film production going.
D) Takes a lot of crap from different creative prima donnas

Can you learn these things any other way? Sure, talk to a real Hollywood producer. But if you don't have access to one, pick up Linson's book. There are some really fun anecdotes in here, like dinner with Hunter S. Thompson, talking wardrobe with DeNiro, and wrangling re-writes out of David Mamet.

"A Pound of Flesh" will be of interest to aspiring producers and those who enjoy finding out what happnens before and while the cameras roll.

Not a necessary read for all, but for those into the film world. Linson's writing style is highly conversational and pleasurable to read.

This book is about 100X better than Lydia Obst's egotisticalpiece. Indeed, Linson is remarkably ego-free - and he's worked with DeNiro, De Palma, Mamet, and others. His tales are entertaining, at times harrowing, and best of all, he describes the process of assembling all the elements to produce a picture. Not a knockout, but a solid, informative piece of work. I'd like to meet Linson one day.

In an honest, engaging, and pithy memoir, Art Linson manages to convey not only what a producer is and does in modern Hollywood, but also why that individual is so important both in the creation and final success of the product. If American film stands at the nexus of creativity and enterprise, the producer is the individual who must mediate the inevitable clash between these immutable forces, and Linson openly recalls his successes as well as his failures. It's not always pretty, but it's always good.

In fact,the book's great strength is Linson's success in divorcing himself - or his ego - from his topic, allowing the reader to learn with the author, rather than from him. The entire process of the creation of a film, from pitch to production to premiere, including unpleasant diversions like Turnaround Hell and rites like Test Screenings, is laid before us through Linson's formative years as a producer.

What the reader ends with is an understanding of the filmmaking process that no textbook could convey, and that few insiders would be willing to impart to a tyro.

This is truly a primer on movie production that belongs on the shelf of everyone from development executive to film student to movie-lover.

I found this book randomly in my local library, and being fascinated by the film industry I decided to give it a go. So glad I did. Clever and colorful, this book details the logistics and lunacy of aspiring filmakers running the gauntlet that is Cannes. I was inspired and touched by the subjects, awed and entertained by their tenacity and turmoil, and laughing throughout. A great read for anyone even remotely interested in the movie biz

This book was fabuously written. It brings together the work and comedy element of the Cannesfilm festival and the characters portrayed within. I laughed all the way through.

A lot of supposedly funny books are tiresome because their authors are trying so hard to be funny, but this book is not one of them. Stephen Walker has written a really funny book because he knows how to put what's funny in front of you and then get out of the way. He has a great sense of timing and an ear for the spoken word but his book isn't just about all the wild stuff that happens during the making of his documentary. Walker is willing to show you himself making a fool of himself, the traditional soul of comedy, but he does more than play the clown. You see the drive of the documentary filmmaker in his need to understand what's going on inside the heads of the filmmakers he's filming. His connection to his filmmaker-subjects is a tilt-a-whirl checkerboard of empathy and distance. The troubles he runs into are funny, awful, pathetic, outrageous, goofy, tragic, stupid, dumb, hilarious. I like Walker because he doesn't force anything. The things he finally doesn't understand are allowed to remain as rough and puzzling as they really are. It's definitely a funny book, a really funny book--because the tears are as real as the laughs. So what I'm saying already is buy the book, Walker should laugh all the way to the bank.

If you're a film buff with a "Saturday Night Live" kind of humor, King of Cannes is the book for you. This lusty tale of an outrageous wannabe film maker fairly explodes with wisecracks, double entendres, and anatomical references.

Related in diary form, these are the angst loaded revelations of Stephen Walker, a British film maker who gives added meaning to neuroses and is obsessed with not only going to but making a splash at the Cannes Film Festival.

Walker wants to make it big with a documentary. He attributes this drive to his "mum," a mother who "brought him up in a house of locked doors. The downstairs loo was always locked. If my mother was in the kitchen, she'd lock the door to her bedroom."

Well, you get the picture.

Just why restricted access to the rooms in his house spawned an interest in documentaries remains unexplained.

There is much in King Of Cannes that remains unexplained, but it is often hilarious as Walker bamboozles a backer into investing cash in a proposed film. Walker's intention is to document the experiences of four unknown but ambitious film makers who will stop at nothing to succeed at Cannes. He wants "the most dangerous, the most unhinged, the most daring, the ones who kill their grannies to get their movies made or sold."

With no performers, no story and 74 days until Cannes, Walker's quest for inspiration and cast members takes him to the Berlin Film Festival, which he finds as appealing as a brick shopping center and the films shown less than interesting - bizarre but uninteresting.

Dublin's Film Festival is also unrewarding, but the pubs are warm and friendly.

Walker's road to Cannes is more than rocky, but once there he is surrounded by total lunacy. He participates in meetings that resemble The Mad Hatter's Tea Party, discovers which pavilions have free booze or gratis Ray-Bans, and finds an indescribable cast of characters. There is Zonca, a French director, the "next Truffaut," who takes ten minutes to mount the twenty-two red carpeted steps to the entrance of the Palais as he savors his "orgy of adulation."

Of course, there are Brits, such as the creative group who motor to Cannes in a van decorated with a mammoth marijuana leaf. Their hope is to find funding for a film titled "Amsterdam." Another Englishman commandeers a vacant phone booth for his office.

An Oxford graduate and film director, Walker lives in London. In reality, he has just completed a documentary on Cannes, "Waiting For Harvey."

He writes, "I'm waiting for Harvey Weinstein to buy the rights so I can make the movie of the book of the movie. Who knows? Maybe I'll get to Cannes."

If he does, it is hoped that he'll keep a diary.

While often amusing, documentary maker Stephen Walker's account of his attempted manipulation of a handful of filmmakers at the Cannes Film Festival is ultimately a fundamentally dishonest book. Despite making a memorable if over-directed 'Everyman' documentary on veterans of the Somme, the author proved hopelessly out of his depth when faced with an industry that failed to conform to his often facile preconceptions. Walker set out to mock a group of hopefuls trying to launch their careers for comic effect, only to be occasionally frustrated in his attempts to manoeuvre them into stereotypical situations by (most of) the filmmakers' inherent professionalism and dignity. Absurdly uninformed on his subject and held in growing contempt by his own production team, he cut one duo of filmmakers out of the programme because, to his dismay, they had a successful series of meetings, only to be blown out himself by another who turned out to be a major award winner who saw through him in moments.

While often telling stories against himself and stressing his own inadequacies as a documentarian (he makes no bones about not knowing the first thing about his subject), it's often to cover up worse transgressions. In the resulting TV documentary, 'Waiting for Harvey,' one of his 'victims' produced a video tape shot before their meeting detailing exactly how Walker was going to try to get easy laughs out of his attempts to sell his feature, hitting the nail on the head with astonishing accuracy, but whereas Walker admits to all kinds of minor offences, you'll find no mention of his unmasking here - maybe his ego couldn't handle it.

It's an easy, gossipy read, but don't mistake it for the truth.