William Fichtner Books

I loved this movie. It is far from the best Blu-ray conversion however as it is barely better than regular DVD. To be expected I supposed as it was one of the earlier titles.

Black Hawk Down is indeed a story of modern warfare. Even though it occurred 15 years ago, there is really no other comparable, true-life story of the modern U.S. military in action against an enemy that is well-matched, with sheer numbers facing technological superiority. It is for this reason that I bought the 3-disc edition, to get the extra documentaries and commentaries. The former I've watched, with the History channel's 2-hour documentary, with Mark Bowden's comments more interesting than the 1-hour Frontline piece. I look forward to watching the movie again and again with the various commentaries. After watching this movie, with it's often painful realism, other military movies seem almost unwatchable they are so cliched and Hollywood. This is a fascinating collection of discs to watch.

everyone who loves a was movie needs to buy this movie and at 15 bucks you can't go wrong. this is a great blu ray conversion. a must have.

Had this already in DVD, I think it is a much better film in 1080P. Good story, great director and cast. Buy it.
GG

Black Hawk Down is easily one of the best wat movies ever made. The war seqeunces are intense and hard to watch at times. But Ridley Scott has made a brilliant film with amazing cinematography and a fast paced film. Josh Hartnett really made his name in film in the lead role and I'm surpised he didn't get more action roles in the later years of his carrer.

I loved this movie. It is far from the best Blu-ray conversion however as it is barely better than regular DVD. To be expected I supposed as it was one of the earlier titles.

Black Hawk Down is indeed a story of modern warfare. Even though it occurred 15 years ago, there is really no other comparable, true-life story of the modern U.S. military in action against an enemy that is well-matched, with sheer numbers facing technological superiority. It is for this reason that I bought the 3-disc edition, to get the extra documentaries and commentaries. The former I've watched, with the History channel's 2-hour documentary, with Mark Bowden's comments more interesting than the 1-hour Frontline piece. I look forward to watching the movie again and again with the various commentaries. After watching this movie, with it's often painful realism, other military movies seem almost unwatchable they are so cliched and Hollywood. This is a fascinating collection of discs to watch.

everyone who loves a was movie needs to buy this movie and at 15 bucks you can't go wrong. this is a great blu ray conversion. a must have.

Had this already in DVD, I think it is a much better film in 1080P. Good story, great director and cast. Buy it.
GG

Black Hawk Down is easily one of the best wat movies ever made. The war seqeunces are intense and hard to watch at times. But Ridley Scott has made a brilliant film with amazing cinematography and a fast paced film. Josh Hartnett really made his name in film in the lead role and I'm surpised he didn't get more action roles in the later years of his carrer.

It is too easy to compare this to Pulp Fiction but yes it has a lot in common with the Tarantino film. Clever dialogue, three main stories whose characters overlap and lots of jumping forward and backward in time. It is still a lot of fun and what sets this film apart is its energy and extremely talented young cast. The first story concerns Ronna (Sarah Polley). She is desperate enough to become a drug dealer for one night since she is facing eviction. Her coworker Simon (Desmond Askew) who deals from the supermarket where they both work has just left for Vegas and two of his customers soap actors Zach and Adam (Jay Mohr and Scott Wolfe) are hoping to score something "euphoric". They ask Ronna if she can hook them up instead. Ronna agrees and becomes involved with Simon's dealer Todd (Timothy Olyphant). He gives her the drugs even though he doesn't do favors and Ronna doesn't have enough money to pay for them. When she meets Zach and Adam for the buy she can tell that something isn't right so she flushes the pills and leaves before anything can happen to her. Now she doesn't have the cash or the pills to give back to Todd and to top it off her best friend Claire (Katie Holmes) who was against the plan from the beginning is being held as collateral by Todd. Ronna comes up with an idea of how she can make the money back. The second story concerns Simon and his trip to Vegas with his mates (Taye Diggs, James Duval, and a hilarious Breckin Meyer). During their crazy two days in Vegas they have to combat diarrhea from the all you can eat shrimp buffet and two small time Mafiosos who want to kill them since Simon as he puts it "slept with two girls, stole a car, and shot a bouncer". This story was the most humorous notably Breckin Meyer as a whiteboy who "sees black" when he looks in the mirror and Taye Diggs listening to him with little patience. It was also fun to see Frank the rabbit from Donnie Darko James Duval out of the bunny suit. The final story concerns Zach and Adam. Turns out they got busted for pot and in order to have the charges dropped they have to give the cops Simon. Wearing a wire they arrange the buy from Simon but instead make the deal with Ronna who had the good sense to leave and not go through with it. Their handler is a cop named Burke (William Fichtner). Fichtner a character actor who usually plays twisted sadists is so funny in this role it is as the EPK says an unforgettable performance. Burke is interested in these guys, really interested. He comments on their muscular bodies and wonders if they have girlfriends. He even handcuffs them and demonstrates the proper way to frisk and cuff a suspect. Just when you think Burke is gay the script reveals him to be something else entirely same goes for Zach and Adam. The whole Burke subplot is just as funny if not funnier than the Vegas segment. The film ties up all the loose ends in terms of Ronna and the drug deal, Claire and Todd's relationship, Zach and Adam after Burke is done with them, and if the Mafiosos ever catch up with Simon. Sarah Polley and Katie Holmes are both very sexy and equally good actresses. It is nice to see Holmes with her long hair and a little curvier than what she looks like today. The film has a pulsing techno soundtrack throughout as the main showpiece is a rave where all the characters collide. The DVD has eleven deleted scenes some good some bad, three music videos including No Doubt, a very brief six minute making of that features some good interviews, and a director and editor commentary.

This clever child of Pulp Fiction and Rashomon is a sheer delight. If you are tired of Miracle on 34th Street and A Christmas Carol or are just looking for another Christmas film then look no further. Although not recomended for youngsters, don't let the talk of drugs and sex deter you. It is all done in a spirit of fun. You will see a lot of your favorites from TV (including the present Mrs. Tom Cruise) and find much to make you laugh.

Normally I would give "Go" 4 stars, but since I am in it as a movie extra during the rave scene, it gets 5 stars. God it was so long ago since I worked on this, when I was young and still able to do raves. I remember after filming the last rave scene, we wrapped at 6 in the morning at the Santa Monica airport. I had to be at Paramount Studios to film a tv pilot the same morning. I slept in my car for 1/2 an hour and worked the rest of the day exhausted. My memories of the making of "Go". I just remember how magical it was filming the rave scenes, it was good times, cool music and the energy was fantastic. The scenes are some of the better parts of the movie. "Go" is definately a unique film, it still stands the test of time and holds it's own. The acting is great, I love Timothy Olyphants role the best, he is intense as the drug dealer and hot. I was shocked to see him recently in "Live Free or Die Hard", we're all getting old, I saw his grey hairs. His acting was better in this film, same type of jerk character though. Who would have ever thought Katie Holmes would end up marrying Tom Cruise. She was so young when she did this, I'm sure she didn't have a clue either. This was probably her only good movie role despite all her fortune and fame. Honestly, she is a crap actress and sad that her legacy could be just the "wife" of Mr. Cruise. With all the sidetracking I've done in this review, I hope someone finds it interesting, a little behind the scenes of "Go", my little part of history in the film, just a lowly movie extra dancin' in the background.

I love this movie! I live for the cat scene. It's a fun preclub movie. I just hate when Dawson's Creek characters move away from the Creek and onto the silver screen. If I have to watch Kate Holmes push her hair behind her right ear, while she angles her head down and shrugs her shoulders, ONE MORE TIME!!! AHHHH! She needs to play a bald roll. It will mark the end of her career.

Okay, I went off there. Can you blame me? How many more Sandra Bullocks do we really need?

I recently caught a viewing of Go, at a independent theater in New York where director Doug Liman spoke after the showing. It seemed that he genuinely believed this was his best work (also did Swingers, and Mr and Mrs Smith), he seemed reminiscent of the time he was doing independent films. What killed this films chances when it came out(besides the state of film in the late 90's) I think was the top billing of Katie Holmes. A lot of people probably thought this film was your average teen drama, but it was hardly that. I was one of the youngest people at the screening (21), but everyone was laughing, and excited. Like a previous reviewer said, this is a young adult thriller. The film is an adrenaline rush, the plot is out of sequence (Pulp Fiction similarity), and its key plot points include: a drug deal gone wrong, rave party, crazy Vegas trip, and an undercover drug bust gone wrong. The characters are all great, acting is especially good (Polly and Olymphant were the best), and the story never ebbed. Every minute is worth it (it's only 90 minutes). A tribute to decadence, and recklessness all for our viewing pleasure.

-If you like/dislike the review let me know

Isn't the main idea of a movie to ENTERTAIN, even if the film maker is trying to deliver a message or educate? Crash is not entertaining and I couldn't figure out the message (if there was one). Perhaps the message is that racism still exists in America. So who doesn't know that already? There were too many characters in this movie and no hero or person that we could identify with. What WERE the critics thinking? Makes you wonder sometimes how the critics can sometimes be so far out of touch with what the public likes. Makes me begin to wonder why we even listen to the critics, as they too often get it wrong. This is another one of those soulless movies that critics seem to adore (such as No County for Old Men, another waste of time). Not even the big stars can rescue this stinker. Did anyone read the script before they agreed to be in this? Amazes me that this is one of the most rented movies from Blockbuster. For a movie that tries to connect the lives of characters, Babel does a much better and more plausible job.

Many lessons of life which expertly come together at the end. Don't miss it. It just may change your views a bit.

Two black men hold up a wealthy white class couple and steal their car. Another couple, this time black, gets pulled over by two white policeman. One of the policemen victimizes the woman and later in the story heroicly saves her from a car accident. It's tear dropping. In another life, there is a black detective that gets involved in a racy case about a white male cop who supposedly shot some black men without good reason. That same detective receives a promotion just because he's black, which helps bolster the political reputation of a white man's dream. These episodes obviously point at black men as the spark behind illegal circumstances called crime. To demonstrate blacks in film as the catalyst behind rapid crime rates is like blaming that person right in front of his face; and he's paying for it.

This film is an in-your-face, contrived, waste of celluloid. What became of subtlety? We all know that race is an issue in the United States, but do we really need it spelled out in such a tawdry manner? Are people so morally dubious that nuance escapes them?

The worst part of this film is how it delights in its own over-the-top coincidences. As if you are blown away by the profundity. Such idiocy goes so far that the actors are forced to pervert their skills in a sad attempt to salvage some sinking realism. One scene, where Ryan Phillipe shoots an unarmed black man, is particularly galling. In this lame scene, Phillipe is forced to abandon the development of his character completely and give in to the politically correct message being shoved down the viewer's throat. It is absurd and obscene!

Do I sympathize with some of the important issues discussed in this film? Of course. However, if your idea of portraying important issues involves bludgeoning the audience over the head in such a blatant manner, then the message is bound to fail, or worse, infuriate.

My only thought as I finished viewing this film: What a blown oppurtunity.

There are few movies in life that are "experiences"~ where the audience does not walk out of the theater, but staggers out. "Crash" is one of those rare gems that always haunts the imagination, because it does crash into all of us. I had no desire to watch this film, but relented simply because it won the Oscar. I saw every other movie nominated that year, and none come close to "Crash": it is a story of race, redemption, anger, awareness, and ultimately, the neighborhoods we live in. In the slightest of roles, Tony Danza captures the gritty reality of race expectations. His minor role is a snapshot of the other players in the film (Sandra Bullock as a snotty bitch?? Beautifully played....)

This film not only should bask in the glory of the Oscar, but move onto AFI's top 100 movies of all time. Yeah, it's that good.

HD makes this movie so much better. It was good before but HD makes its better

I am not gong to review the movie as everyone has seen it and I only bought it for the HD-DVD aspect.

Like a lot of older re-released high def movies, the studio did not take extra steps on the re-release to take advantage of the greater capability of HD-DVD. The result is that neither the visuals nor the sound knock your socks off like the do in a full-on HD-DVD release. If you have the DVD version, no need to upgrade. If you don't and want the movie, you might as well get the HD release, but buy it used for less than $15 (delivered)...or just get a used DVD for $5.

I love this movie and so when i had the chance to get it in HD for dirt cheap i took the time to get it. The HD version is chrisp and clear and the sound is very sharp. Get this movie as it should be a must for anyone who collects HD DVDs :D

If there were nothing else on I'd watch it again. This is just an average movie about a STORM based on true events. There is no real character development, no action, adventure or humor. Its a great STORM, just not a great movie.

Not that it was a bad movie, or lacked drama and good characterization, but there were enough technical inaccuracies to cause this mariner trouble.

First of all, let's ask some questions:

Why were the outriggers out and the paravanes down when the seas were in the 80' to 150' foot range (as depicted; more if you consider the last wave)? Why did the crew wait so long to batten down the wheelhouse windows? They knew the storm was coming. They knew how bad it would be. Why didn't they make proper preparations to meet it?

Why wasn't the crew in the wheelhouse? I've been in some bad blows, and when it gets really bad, everybody usually hangs out in the wheelhouse with their survival suits within arm's reach. When it's that bad, and the boat has to turn around in monster seas, riding out the turn in the fo'c's'le or galley is the last thing anybody wants to do.

Why would anyone think they could remount a SSB antenna in a 50 knot wind when the smallest whip antenna is about 23'? If the antenna doesn't rip your arm off, how are you going to splice the coax? And why not just lay out an emergency long wire antenna on deck?

Speaking of which: I thought the Andrea Gail had a long wire antenna and not a whip antenna. I believe that in the photo of the Hannah Boden, which Linda Greenlaw states is a sistership of the Andrea Gail, you can see a long wire antenna running aft from the masthead to the goal post.

By the way, Greenlaw states in her book that her boat, the Hannah Boden, was 100'. Sebastion Junger, the author of the book, stated on a pre-movie hype news program that the Andrea Gail was 80'. I tend to believe Greenlaw over Junger regarding LOA. And I tend to believe it had a long wire antenna. You'd think it would given its range of operation. Also, if the boat was 100' , the wave at the end would have been about 200'. My understanding is that the largest non-seismic wave ever recorded was 112', measured scientifically in the North Pacific by researchers aboard the USS Ramapo on February 7th, 1933.

Also....

Where can I get one of those blow torches that stays lit in 50 knots of wind and spray?

Don't get me wrong. I liked the movie. I liked the effects. I thought the film makers did some good things. But I don't think the movie paid homage to the crew of the Andrea Gail or commercial fishermen. I think Junger's melodramatic overspeculations of the sinking (not to mention his speculation about what it's like to drown) are an insult to the thousands of fishermen and other seafarers who've lost their limbs and worse in much less spectacular ways. In truth, the vast majority of commercial fishing accidents and sinkings aren't caused by gigantic Hollywood waves. They're the result of separate incidents and seemingly insignificant details stacking-up and falling like a house of cards.

With all due respect to the people of Gloucester and the friends and family of those who died on the Andrea Gail, and to the film makers and the actors, I humbly submit a different cause and effect scenario with regard to the sinking.

In my opinion, had the crew been given the time depicted in both the book and the movie, the ending might have been quite different. Those men were experienced and capable fisherman who had previously handled anything the sea had thrown at them. What probably happened was they started home with a freighted boat. It got rough, very rough, and the vessel started taking on water, probably from some insidious place in the stern, e.g. the rudder box or shaft seal. They didn't know she was taking on water until it was too late, at which time the vessel rolled and sank before they could launch the raft, get into their survival suits, or trigger the EPIRB. How many times has it happened that way? A freighted boat. A slow leak. Bad weather.

-seabgb

HD makes this movie so much better. It was good before but HD makes its better

I am not gong to review the movie as everyone has seen it and I only bought it for the HD-DVD aspect.

Like a lot of older re-released high def movies, the studio did not take extra steps on the re-release to take advantage of the greater capability of HD-DVD. The result is that neither the visuals nor the sound knock your socks off like the do in a full-on HD-DVD release. If you have the DVD version, no need to upgrade. If you don't and want the movie, you might as well get the HD release, but buy it used for less than $15 (delivered)...or just get a used DVD for $5.

I love this movie and so when i had the chance to get it in HD for dirt cheap i took the time to get it. The HD version is chrisp and clear and the sound is very sharp. Get this movie as it should be a must for anyone who collects HD DVDs :D

If there were nothing else on I'd watch it again. This is just an average movie about a STORM based on true events. There is no real character development, no action, adventure or humor. Its a great STORM, just not a great movie.

Not that it was a bad movie, or lacked drama and good characterization, but there were enough technical inaccuracies to cause this mariner trouble.

First of all, let's ask some questions:

Why were the outriggers out and the paravanes down when the seas were in the 80' to 150' foot range (as depicted; more if you consider the last wave)? Why did the crew wait so long to batten down the wheelhouse windows? They knew the storm was coming. They knew how bad it would be. Why didn't they make proper preparations to meet it?

Why wasn't the crew in the wheelhouse? I've been in some bad blows, and when it gets really bad, everybody usually hangs out in the wheelhouse with their survival suits within arm's reach. When it's that bad, and the boat has to turn around in monster seas, riding out the turn in the fo'c's'le or galley is the last thing anybody wants to do.

Why would anyone think they could remount a SSB antenna in a 50 knot wind when the smallest whip antenna is about 23'? If the antenna doesn't rip your arm off, how are you going to splice the coax? And why not just lay out an emergency long wire antenna on deck?

Speaking of which: I thought the Andrea Gail had a long wire antenna and not a whip antenna. I believe that in the photo of the Hannah Boden, which Linda Greenlaw states is a sistership of the Andrea Gail, you can see a long wire antenna running aft from the masthead to the goal post.

By the way, Greenlaw states in her book that her boat, the Hannah Boden, was 100'. Sebastion Junger, the author of the book, stated on a pre-movie hype news program that the Andrea Gail was 80'. I tend to believe Greenlaw over Junger regarding LOA. And I tend to believe it had a long wire antenna. You'd think it would given its range of operation. Also, if the boat was 100' , the wave at the end would have been about 200'. My understanding is that the largest non-seismic wave ever recorded was 112', measured scientifically in the North Pacific by researchers aboard the USS Ramapo on February 7th, 1933.

Also....

Where can I get one of those blow torches that stays lit in 50 knots of wind and spray?

Don't get me wrong. I liked the movie. I liked the effects. I thought the film makers did some good things. But I don't think the movie paid homage to the crew of the Andrea Gail or commercial fishermen. I think Junger's melodramatic overspeculations of the sinking (not to mention his speculation about what it's like to drown) are an insult to the thousands of fishermen and other seafarers who've lost their limbs and worse in much less spectacular ways. In truth, the vast majority of commercial fishing accidents and sinkings aren't caused by gigantic Hollywood waves. They're the result of separate incidents and seemingly insignificant details stacking-up and falling like a house of cards.

With all due respect to the people of Gloucester and the friends and family of those who died on the Andrea Gail, and to the film makers and the actors, I humbly submit a different cause and effect scenario with regard to the sinking.

In my opinion, had the crew been given the time depicted in both the book and the movie, the ending might have been quite different. Those men were experienced and capable fisherman who had previously handled anything the sea had thrown at them. What probably happened was they started home with a freighted boat. It got rough, very rough, and the vessel started taking on water, probably from some insidious place in the stern, e.g. the rudder box or shaft seal. They didn't know she was taking on water until it was too late, at which time the vessel rolled and sank before they could launch the raft, get into their survival suits, or trigger the EPIRB. How many times has it happened that way? A freighted boat. A slow leak. Bad weather.

-seabgb