| Videohound's Golden Movie Retriever 2003: The Complete Guide to Movies on Videocassette and Dvd (Videohound's Golden Movie Retriever) (9 customer reviews)Paperback: (Visible Ink Press)
|
Reader Reviews |
 Not a Videohound review, Saturday, April 23, 2005Whoever thinks this book offers adequate review must have as little understanding of the movies watched as these reviewers, or like these reviewers, does not actually watch movies. I can forgive a reviewer not having the same opinion as myself but at least it should be an educated opinion. Time after time the facts of the movies are incorrect, indicating they were not watched or only scanned. Also, the lack of a depth of understanding of cinema history, the lack of knowledge of a director's art and repertoire, etc. is unforgiveable. A good example is Bertolucci's The Spider's Strategem where the facts of the movie are given incorrectly. This guide is a good reference to the existence of a video, for lists of the actors and their movies, lists of directors and their movies, etc., but its reviews are sketchy, ill informed, and unsophisticated. |
 WHAT'S THE POINT?/WELL, YEAH..., Friday, March 25, 2005I have no idea why anyone would want a book that critiques movies. The reference guide(s) have been useful to me a few times, but not enough to make this book worth my time. Every **** film I have tried to watch -- even the ones of modern day -- are the most boring films I've ever seen! The only ones that aren't boring are E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial & a many of the Disney films they rated such...some of the most compelling films I've ever seen -- i.e.: Batman Returns, Clockers -- are treated mediocre and given far less attention than they're worth. Some of my personal favorites -- i.e.: Ghostbusters I & II, Bringing Out The Dead, Greg Araki's nowhere -- are nit picked apart to reveal their imperfections while films like Psycho (1960) & Howard's End seemingly can not be proven to be worthy within their review; the review for Psycho (1960) is also contradicted by the review of the re-make (they say Psycho is tame by today's standards...what standards are they talking about???; ** films like CANDYMAN and LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT perhaps???). I may be just plain blind, but it seems to me as if Videohound just tells people what they already know: "these are classics, and those are not". And what is a classic anyway? How many people who don't spend all day with their grandparents can actually say they LIKED the original Psycho? THE FILM IS ONLY 45 YEARS OLD!!! That may seem like a long time to this fast-food society where anything beyond 5 minutes is "old", but considering how history weaves through time, 45 years is NOTHING!!! It's not even a full lifetime of a soliatary human, let alone enough time to see if people will be coming back to this or that film time and time again through the centuries! Nontheless, it's a happy medium between Leonard Maltin's whimsical opinion and Roger Ebert's overly-generous ratings. And, if you actually care about movies enough to research them but can't remember simple details about them such as who directed them or who starred in them, this book is a good tool to have around...and for the price it's going for on Amazon.com at least it's not un-worth it; I, however, would like to learn about movies the old-fashioned way: WATCHING them. |
| Unfortunately, too big for the wrong purpose, Wednesday, September 10, 2003 Very interesting book in it's first half: a bit more than 800 pages of about 1600. The reviews are well presented and easier to read than the competition in the pocket book format. Interesting style of writing. Unfortunately, after the reviews, they spend much too many pages in making all kinds of subcategories: let's say there is bear in a movie they'll list all the movies with bears and so on... for hundreds of spoiled pages. So the book ends up being huge like a phone directory, but much more expensive, and as awkward to have around in the living room. A leaner version, with a lower price, would be a winner! |
 A real great rrrrrrrrrreview for a great rrrrrrrreview book, Friday, April 18, 2003This book is so much better than the Leonard Maltin paperbacks that I have purchased in the past. It is full of more information, it is bigger and easier to read and it certainly can not get lost. It is a valuable part of our living room. I love having it right there to help in choosing our viewing selections. I like to highlight the movies that we have seen and compare notes with the review after! |
| Gotta have it!, Sunday, February 23, 2003 Ever since the demise of the wonderful Cinebooks library with its yearly annuals, I've had to rely on the Videohound. While it doesn't begin to offer the wealth of detail that Cinebooks did, it is none the less a very comprehensive listing of available films--both for TV and for general release. The reviews are intelligent and fair and it does have an extremely useful series of indexes at the back: the performer index--in case you remember the name of someone in the cast but not the name of the film; the director index and an awards index. If you absolutely must know the details about a film, or what roles a particular actor has played, here's your book. Other sources, like Leonard Maltin's guide just don't cut it. |
Gooroo Reviews | spyware reviews
