Franchise is pretty solid with understated charm of George Burns, but this is my clear favorite. Very good story arc, quiet scenes & acting.
Spoiler-free Movie Review of Oh, God! You Devil:
Here’s another family favorite from the back of the VHS tape cabinet. I don’t think I saw this in the theater, but I know we rented it (remember renting videotapes?) and also taped it off of cable. I can see the yellowing cassette label in my mind still.
Even though this picture was made 30 years, I believe there’s still room for this kind of quiet picture. I like the little moments that George Burns is capable of. Such a gifted comic. This picture sort of killed the franchise, since it’s much more fun to watch Burns as the Devil than as God. But after they pushed out three of these films I don’t think anyone was in a position to complain…
Rather than trying to write a narrative review of this picture that I’ve seen so many times, I just queued it up with my laptop in front of me and put down some thoughts. And these are those:
Caring father singing Fugue for Tinhorns (from Guys and Dolls) to his sick kid. What a sweet little opening. Possibly the subconscious reason I sang this to my little girl as a baby…
Y’know what’s funny? Even the actor names in the 80’s sounded like the decade itself; Ted Wass, Ron Silver, Roxanne Hart, Eugene Roche, Robert Desiderio, these are 80’s names. When’s the last time you ran into a Roxanne or Eugene?
This film is the only example I can think of where I approve of one actor playing multiple roles. It isn’t just cool to see George Burns play God and the Devil, it makes narrative sense.
The Devil goes by the name Harry Tophet. “I love to scare the hell out of people.”
“He hates it. Says he wouldn’t play it for his dog. You ever heard that? Wouldn’t play it for a dog?”
Love that Tophet has a “computer” in his dashboard. Pretty good for 1984. But what is the Devil driving? Is that a K car?
“Hawaiian Chablis? I just never saw a wine with an expiration date before.”
I do enjoy watching movies where the answering machine figures into the story, even mildly. It’s just amusing to me…
The fire and brimstone to alert the lead character that he’s messing with sinister forces? A vaudeville/ballpark organ and a sound effects tape, mixed with a Hitchcockian dolly zoom?
At the time I saw this picture I’d never been to a real wedding reception. When I finally attended one many years later, I somewhat expected people to actually do the hokey pokey, thanks to this movie…
Interesting that someone who was perfectly willing to eat a dead snail would suddenly object to a living snail. I don’t get escargot. People are weird…
“It’s the little things I enjoy.”
Little old-fashioned tricks are so effective.
I remember just about every single line and moment of this movie. I have no idea how many times I watched it from 1984-1986…
Billy Wayne’s contract expires and he’s nothing but a burning contract. See, there’s some real menace here, under the soft and safe exterior. Burns actually has an nice underlying edge.
“Things have a way of working out.”
The scene at the record label is just fantastic. Burns would have made a great negotiator had he not gone into showbiz.
I know that Billy Wayne’s music is terrible, but I can’t dislike it – I grew up with this cheesy soft rock. I actually really like the song for the rock n roll lifestyle montage…
Also, the little piano ballad Bobby Shelton is writing for his wife is lovely…
I wonder if this film was a big influence on Richard Marx. There’s a real resemblance…
The best moments in this picture are the quiet conversations. There’s a really interesting pace going on here. Nothing moves fast, but it never drags. Scenes have lots of room to breathe. I genuinely do miss this 1980’s film-making style. Mostly…
Maybe there’s a lot of nostalgia going here, but I really still enjoyed Oh God!, You Devil decades later. I don’t know if it can be said that it holds up, any more than anything from the 80’s does, but it still works. Give it a watch; I bet you’ll enjoy it far more than you expect…
[schema type=”movie” name=”Oh, God! You Devil” description=”George Burns is back as God, but oops, here he is as Satan, too. A young rock star is ready to sell his soul to Satan, and Satan is all too happy to oblige. Oops! Seems the fellow was watched over by God as a baby, so now the almighty and his nemesis have to duke it out over the soul.” director=”Paul Bogart” actor_1=”George Burns” ]
Look, it’s absolutely nuts. I’ve seen the picture a bunch of times and I’m still not even sure if I like it. But I am sure that I love it…
Spoiler-free Movie Review of The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension:
Oddly enough, I never caught this movie until last year, when it turned 30 years old. I don’t know how I missed it all these years. Actually, sure I do. We seldom had movie channels on cable growing up (something I’m largely grateful for) and this sure as hell wasn’t going to play on network tv. Cult movies like this need a champion – someone who will stick up for them and insist you watch them even after you’ve seen five minutes when flipping and immediately written it off. I have my own Hong Kong Cavaliers who have successfully sat me down for Big Trouble in Little China, Highlander, and Better Off Dead; less so for Eraserhead. I’m proud to say I’ve been that champion for I’m Gonna Git You Sucka, Tapeheads, House Party and The Frighteners. (We all stumbled upon Bad Taste together back in the 80’s, but I’m not sure any of us tried to win over anyone else with that one.)
The main thing about The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension is that it’s cool. If you disagree with that statement, you probably shouldn’t bother watching. It is crucial that you find the whole premise kind of interesting and think the guy is awesome. Because it is a painfully flawed movie, so without the overriding enjoyment of the thing, you’re not going to get anything out of it.
Even if you are all in on the concept, it’s still a seriously bumpy ride. It sounded so crazy to me when I first heard it: action/adventure star who is a neurosurgeon, samurai, physicist, test pilot and musician with a special team of sidekicks. It’s so absurd but at least it’s original. Then I find out about 1930’s pulp fiction character Doc Savage, a physician, surgeon, adventurer, explorer and musician with a special team of sidekicks. Oh, he also studies martial arts. I have absolutely no idea how Banzai even made it to film – the whole premise sounds like a rights nightmare.
But even if the character has a clear ancestor, Dr. Banzai remains a unique character. Batman, after all, owes a great deal to Sherlock Holmes, but is no less original because of it. Buckaroo Banzai and the Hong Kong Cavaliers are their own creation and their adventures across the 8th dimension make for a fresh tale. It makes very little sense, though.
The first half of the movie is far more interesting than the latter part; ridiculously so. The story simply can’t keep up with the characters.
“Be cool. She’ll hold.”
The jet car is amazing and the premise of passing through solid matter is good sci-fi. Of course there will be interesting results and that’s fine too. But the outcome is patently absurd. Even 30 years ago this character design must have looked truly silly.
“But it’s supposed to be silly” I hear you protest, “it’s a comedy”. Is it, though? No one told the filmmakers. I know it contains a lot of humor and things clearly aren’t meant to be taken too seriously, but I reject the idea that this is supposed to be a comedy. And I think that’s a lot of, if not most of, the problem with The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension. The tone is wildly erratic, a sure sign that not everyone was on the same page.
New Jersey: “Why is there a watermelon there?” Reno: “I’ll tell you later.”
It’s no secret that the film was DOA at the box office, that the studio had absolutely no idea what they had been given or what to do with it. In reading about the development of the film, it seems that writer Earl Mac Rauch himself didn’t know what to do with his creation. According to director & co-producer W.D. Richter, the scripts started out promising and then languished with no endings, as Mac Rauch would start over with entirely new ideas. The film itself makes a lot more sense when you know its provenance; it’s a fantastic idea that not only has no third act, it barely has a second. The whole film feels undercooked as a result. For something that had such a long gestation, it seems to have arrived half-finished.
The opening crawl (another vestige of the old serials and a clear sign of the character’s forbearers) attempts to quickly acquaint you with the titular renaissance man and the setup, but you’re really just being thrown into the deep end of the pool. I don’t have a problem with this, by the way; I appreciate ambitious scripts that expect the audience to keep up. My only issue is that while it explains where the story is opening (with Banzai’s jet car ready to break the dimensional barrier) it adds the following strange coda: “…while high above Earth, an alien spacecraft keeps a nervous watch on Team Banzai’s every move…”. Aliens? Really? You’re leading with aliens? Not only does this supernatural element risk (and succeed) in torpedoing a promising narrative, it doesn’t even make sense within the world of the story. The whole conceit of the rest of the film deals with interdimensional beings – aliens on our own planet but in a different dimension. So why are there other aliens from other planets? Note: you find out eventually – if you can follow the exposition – that they’re all aliens from Planet 10; some of them had a civil war and got trapped in the…ahh, who cares…
The aliens are just poorly designed. There’s no getting around this. The Lectoids and their humor – you’re either in or you’re out. I’m out. When they’re on the screen I’m reaching for the remote. Waste of some good actors…
The villain, Dr. Emilio Lizardo or Lord John Whorfin or whatever the hell he is, shamefully overplayed by John Lithgow, is a similar problem. Lithgow is channeling Il Duce for no apparent reason and the only mercy is that after a big setup he leaves the film for 40 minutes. That’s right – you don’t see the villain again for nearly half the movie. By the time he turns up it’s “Oh. You again?”
There are scads of characters that could have and should have been excised entirely. The Secretary of Defense, the President, some of the henchmen; it isn’t just that they’re useless, it’s that they eat up a ton of screen time and make the story even more incomprehensible…
Some notes jotted down while watching:
The effects in the 8th dimension are very cool. Great visuals.
The opening sequence is just so good; filmed very well. Not sure if this is the original DP’s work, but there’s some great stuff here.
Believe it or not, the jet car is an entirely practical effect. A racing group in California built the thing from scratch. Those shots of a truck being propelled by a rocket? That’s all actually happening…
Something gets attached to the jet car, a living organism or biological remnant. So this is the object that propels the story, huh? What’s that? You say it has nothing to do with the rest of the story? That’s really weird…
The second Lithgow appears on screen the tone of the film instantly changes. Everything is “look, we’re being quirky – aren’t we so strange?”
Must have been really fun to design these sets and all the props.
I’d love to go to this club to see the Cavaliers. The band rocks and the fashion is fantastic. I know this was one of the scenes shot by original DP Jordan Cronenweth (Blade Runner), who was foolishly replaced by the producer.
The band jumps into cover of “Rocket 88” by Jackie Brenston and His Delta Cats – sly reference there, as the song isn’t named in the film and they never get to the vocals – you have to know that’s what song it is. (Buckaroo’s jet car is named HB 88 and bears a license plate reading “ROKIT 88”) See, this is what I mean – there’s some great stuff that makes up for all of the weirdness…
“Is someone out there not having a good time?”
Ellen Barkin as Penny Priddy. What is going on here? Maybe add her to the list of characters to remove.
“No matter where you go, there you are.”
Cover of the Starliners “Since I Don’t Have You” – amazing. Weller actually handled his own singing, trumpet & guitar playing, but not piano.
I love that the Cavaliers are all packing while on stage…
I want the stand up Buckaroo Banzai videogame cabinet
So hard to pick a favorite Cavalier. Clancy Brown as Rawhide is cool as ice, Jeff Goldblum’s Tom Mix inspired New Jersey is pretty funny, but I’ve got a bit of a man-crush on Lewis Smith as Perfect Tommy…
The Blue Blazer Regulars – what a cool group of on call support…
Just realized that the tune New Jersey is playing on the piano back at the house is the end credit music.
President is played by Ronald Lacey (Toht in Raiders of the Lost Ark) channeling Orson Welles. The idea that War of the Worlds wasn’t a hoax but a cover-up is clever, but not as clever as they think it is.
The movie is an hour in before the actual plot is revealed. Having a purpose leads to the whole action part of the film, but the film itself ironically grinds to a crawl at that point. Just about everything that happens after the hour mark is tedious. It’s crazy, but the thing just meanders while meaningless action occurs. I can’t even fathom what the plan is supposed to be…
The set design is insane – I can’t imagine any thought went into it whatsoever. It feels more like a guerilla film, where they just wandered into an industrial area on the weekend without permission and just made use of whatever was there…
And why the hell is this all taking place in New Jersey? Why are they here?
“We are not in the Eighth dimension, we are over New Jersey. Hope is not lost.”
Professor Hikita is last seen in the movie around the hour mark. He was working on a formula Buckaroo got from the Black Lectoids. We never find out what it is for. Oscillation Overthruster? No… Formula to see through the Lectoids disguise? No…
The entire climax of the picture is full of truly bizarre actions. The bad guys spend the entire film trying to get the Overthruster. But despite the thing being in their hostages CLEAR handbag, they don’t find it, or persuade either hostage to help them fix their own Overthruster. When they get nothing that they set out to do, they try to leave anyway? The good guys are no more clever; they’re trying to get the Overthruster to prevent all out war, but when they can’t recover it, they climb aboard the ship? To what end? The denouement is essentially nobody succeeding at anything. It’s weird…
It’s just a real pity that they chose to go with this alien story instead of a much more promising earthly tale about Hanoi Xan, who killed Buckaroo’s parents and wife.
There was an alternate opening showing Buckaroo as a boy with his parents (mom played by Jamie Lee Curtis) making an early attempt at breaking the barrier before being killed by Xan’s sabotage. You can see it on the DVD. It’s interesting and probably should have been left in, even if it would have created as many problems as it solved. Sort of set the tone for a different film than this ended up being…
“Watch for the next adventure of Buckaroo Banzai, Buckaroo Banzai Against the World Crime League” Sigh…if only…
I can’t wait until someone reboots Buckaroo Banzai. This will eventually make a fantastic tv series. Can you imagine the serialized adventures of Buckaroo Banzai and the Hong Kong Cavaliers every week? It would be amazing! I know there have been attempts to bring it to tv. They’ve also put out a few comics in the past few years, also by writer Earl Mac Rauch. I read one series; it was incredibly faithful. By that I mean that it was interesting but maddeningly uneven with loose ends and errors all over the place…
I know it sounds like I dislike the film based on all these criticisms and essentially proposing throwing out half the film, but it’s totally untrue. I really love The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension. I just wish the script was half as interesting as the characters. Still, don’t be mean. Remember, NMWYGTYA…
[schema type=”movie” name=”The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension” description=”Adventurer/surgeon/rock musician Buckaroo Banzai and his band of men, the Hong Kong Cavaliers, take on evil alien invaders from the 8th dimension.” director=”W.D. Richter” actor_1=”Peter Weller” actor_2=”John Lithgow” actor_3=”Ellen Barkin” actor_4=”Jeff Goldblum” actor_5=”Christopher Lloyd” ]
Straightforward coming of age story set in the 60’s – hardly unexplored territory – but a solid picture for all that. Punches its weight…
Spoiler-free Movie Review of The Flamingo Kid:
It’s sometimes hard to predict which films will have a lasting impact and which will be relegated to the mental attic. The Flamingo Kid one of the latter, its lasting legacy being a trivia answer to the question “What film was first to receive the PG-13 rating?” Which is too bad, because it was one of my favorite coming of age films when I was coming of age…
Actually, I never totally understood why it got a PG-13 rating to begin with. It’s a perfectly straightforward teen comedy. I don’t even remember much cursing or nudity, although I haven’t seen it in years. I really don’t need to – I watched this movie more than any John Hughes movie growing up. (Mainly because we had recorded it off of tv during one of those free movie channel weekends that they ran from time to time. The only Hughes picture I was able to tape was The Breakfast Club, which I watched nearly as often.)
The film is part of a subset of films that could comprise their own genre – 1950’s & 60’s boys coming of age. (However, if there’s a single example of a similarly set coming of age story for girls I’m unaware of it.) The picture could have been written by Neil Simon for all its familiarity.
The fact that The Flamingo Kid resides in well-traveled territory isn’t a deal-breaker – there’s a reason they make so many of these pictures, after all.
Set in 1963, The Flamingo Kid finds young Brooklynite Jeffrey Willis (Matt Dillon) taking a chance trip out to an exclusive Long Island beach club where he finds a job, a mentor and love.
The performances help keep this tale fresh. Dillon is charismatic enough for three actors and is tailor made for these young man roles. Janet Jones, known probably more for being Wayne Gretzky’s wife than her acting career, plays the part of Jeffrey’s love interest Carla Samson quite well, plausibly conveying her character’s assertion that she really doesn’t care about the class difference between them.
Richard Crenna plays Phil Brody “The King”, who rules the gin rummy table and takes Jeffrey under his wing. It’s a good role and Crenna fills it well.
The breakout talent of the film, though, is Hector Elizondo as Jeffrey’s father, Arthur. The character is enough of a middle-class, no nonsense father to fill the seemingly de rigeur archetype, but Elizondo makes more of the role. His performance brings forth a gentle humor that seems to hint at the source of his son’s charm, and the script allows for some truly loving exchanges that indicate that his protestations to his son’s behavior and chosen life path are out of concern and caring and not merely the disapproval of a cartoon parental unit.
Filling out the cast are some performances by young talents Fisher Stevens, Steven Weber and Bronson Pinchot, as well as a bit part for Marisa Tomei in her second screen appearance. (First? The Toxic Avenger…)
The Flamingo Kid is both exactly what it looks like and something slightly more. It’s a worthwhile endevour and a lot of fun. It has a great Motown soundtrack and is a great summer movie (despite being released in December for some reason). Reportedly Disney is planning to remake it with Brett Ratner producing. My usual knee jerk reaction to such plans notwithstanding, it’s probably not a bad idea; the picture is perfectly fine as is, but while it did ok at the box office, it never really found a legacy or shelf life and could possibly find a new audience with an update.
Oh, and by the way, the rest of that trivia answer is that although The Flamingo Kid was first to receive the PG-13 rating, it was actually the fifth to be released, after Red Dawn, The Woman in Red, Dreamscape and Dune…
[schema type=”movie” name=”The Flamingo Kid” description=”Jeffrey Willis has just finished high school and isn’t quite sure what the future holds. His parents expect him to go to college but he is starting to find his close-knit family stifling. He gets a summer job at the Flamingo club where he meets Phil Brody, a successful car dealer who fills Jeffrey’s head with ideas about how to make his fortune. Phil is everything Jeffrey would like to be – popular, rich and the best gin rummy player the club has ever seen. Jeffrey’s coming of age includes a romance with the very pretty Carla Samson, but the shine on Phil Brody’s philosophy of life wears off when he uncovers a significant flaw in his character.” director=”Garry Marshall” actor_1=”Matt Dillon” ]
Carpenter tries on new style to great effect with this slow burn alien love story. Straight from the age of acting over action. #DefineBozo
Spoiler-free Movie Review of Starman:
I only vaguely remember seeing Starman on cable at some point. I probably wasn’t interested in the love-heavy story at the time, even if it was courtesy of John Carpenter and starring Jeff Bridges and the love of my early life, Karen Allen.
Executive produced by Michael Douglas? Must be a story there. (There is, although it doesn’t have much to do with Douglas – he brought the project to Columbia. The bigger story is that Columbia optioned two aliens come to Earth projects – this one and another called Night Skies. They had to pick one to run with, so they went with the more adult-themed Starman. Night Skies went over to Univeral Pictures, where it was released under the name E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial. Whoops…)
So Starman had a difficult birth. Despite being started much earlier than the other picture, E.T. came to market much faster and became a juggernaut that sent Starman into a development tailspin. It would take several years for the film to see release as lots of people attached to the project split, seeing the similarities between the films and presumably not wanting to follow such a tough act. Script doctor Dean Riesner was brought in to more or less rewrite Bruce A. Evans & Raynold Gideon’s screenplay (though Riesner would never receive screen credit for bizarre Writers Guild reasons).
Such a different style for Carpenter. He’s definitely to be commended for stretching himself. Carpenter has stated that he took on Starman after his (amazing) 1982 remake of The Thing bombed and he was concerned he was about to get bounced out of Hollywood. This is the only one of his films that received an Academy Award nomination (Best Actor for Bridges).
Bridges is such a fine actor. He plays alien so well. He has this comfort and command of his body that allow him to convey so much personality.
Karen Allen sings! New favorite movie! So good to see such a meaty role for Allen. Her scene in the restaurant, explaining love and death is fantastic.
(Side note: The 1980’s seems to be the decade of actresses wandering around with shirts but not pants. The whole lounging around in nightshirt and underpants thing. It’s not even about being sexy, it’s just about portraying people realistically. And that is sexy in its own way…)
Charles Martin Smith is one of those great character actors that I’m always happy to see. He’s had a good career, but I always think actors like this could use more work.
It’s not an effects picture, of course, but it punches its weight – the practical stuff is well done and in keeping with the tone of the picture. The scene of the morphing/transformation is awfully strange. Effects were done by Stan Winston & Rick Baker, so while there isn’t a ton of FX work, it’s all pretty good…
You know, sometimes the constraints of the time really work in favor of the filmmaker. That’s not to say that not having great tech turns average directors into Hitchcock, but there is a natural suspense that builds when you have to take things slowly and avoid spending too much time focusing on details.
You can always count on Carpenter for an interesting 80’s synth score.
Love the vintage black & orange 1977 Mustang Cobra.
This SETI investigation where they have actual evidence of a flying saucer must be the most low-key, relaxed secret government project of all time. People are just wandering around, transporting the thing in plain sight. No one is filming or documenting anything. They crack the thing open and the first guy to pop through is wearing street clothes and has a cigar…
There’s this older, seemingly more innocent time on display here that must be just as alien to modern kids as it is to the Starman. The picture was made in 1984, but it could just as easily be 1974. It’s hard to imagine this story playing out the same today. People hopping boxcars, sneaking past roadblocks, plus there’s a Woolworth on the Vegas strip…
“Well, I guess the question is who’s the missionary, and who are the cannibals?”
One possible quibble might be that there’s a predictability to the script that probably was there even 30 years ago. But that’s ok; it’s the journey that’s important.
Starman is a great film. More a character-driven road picture than the sci-fi film it started life as, the performances are wonderful and the whole picture has its own pace and feel that may not be groundbreaking, but are completely welcome. Highly recommended…
[schema type=”movie” name=”Starman” description=”He has traveled from a galaxy far beyond our own. He is 100,000 years ahead of us. He has powers we cannot comprehend. And he is about to face the one force in the universe he has yet to conquer. Love.” director=”John Carpenter” actor_1=”Jeff Bridges” actor_2=”Karen Allen” ]
Nearly perfect adaptation, by which I mean it’s just as eye-opening, visceral and difficult to enjoy as the source novel. #ISoldYouYouSoldMe
Spoiler-free Movie Review of Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984):
“It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”
What with one thing and another, I missed the 30th anniversary of Nineteen Eighty-Four this past December. Not that it really matters – the film is timeless. Actually, I only missed finishing my review on time – I most certainly watched the film. Several times, actually. It says a lot about how amazing this film is that I have willingly put it on many times, because it is anything but enjoyable to watch.
“Under the spreading chestnut tree. I sold you, you sold me.”
Nineteen Eighty-Four is a truly disturbing film. A perfectly realized vision of the absolute terror of the source novel. With a surplus of dystopian tales out there now, nothing touches this one. It’s not the obvious stuff, the big displays, it’s the complete acceptance of the horrible state of affairs by the people – explosions happen and no one even looks up.
“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
The Two Minutes’ Hate at the beginning of the film is savagely heartbreaking. One of the ugliest scenes ever put to film.
It’s hard to imagine how this adaptation could possibly be any better. Writer/director Michael Radford constructed an absolute masterpiece. The picture has such a slow pace, but it’s just the thing for this story.
The acting is plusskillful, and needed to be for this material to work so well. John Hurt is absolutely perfect in the role of Winston Smith.
Suzanna Hamilton is the actress who plays Julia. Why did she never become a huge star? She had a good career, but based off of this film, should have been given more work. Hers is a masterful performance, even in a film teeming with them. Richard Burton is predictably great in his last film role.
The film rights to the novel were given by George Orwell’s widow (Sonia) only upon assurance that the picture wouldn’t be a big special effects display. That prohibition works wonders for the enduring quality of the film – it looks like it could have been made any time in the past 50 years or the next 20. The visual look of the film is courtesy of legendary cinematographer Roger Deakins, bleaching out the negatives during processing. Masterful.
About the only misstep in the picture may be the music by Eurythmics (well, it was 1984…), which replaced the original score by Dominic Muldowney, although with the various versions released on home video and in different regions, I’m not really even sure which version I’ve seen. So I’d have to say that the modern music is not as distracting as expected – since I don’t even know if I’ve ever noticed it…
Nineteen Eighty-Four is an exquisite interpretation of Orwell’s defining work. Unusually for such a bleak tale, it has a rewatchability that is at odds with it’s unpleasant portrait of a potential future/present. It’s a brutal book, of course, and the source material has that same counter-intuitive attraction. I don’t know that you could reasonably say that the film is more effective in telling the story, but I wouldn’t hesitate to count this among the more EFFECTIVE adaptations of a classic novel ever to see release…
“If you want a vision of the future, Winston, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever.”
[schema type=”movie” name=”Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984)” description=”George Orwell’s novel of a totalitarian future society in which a man whose daily work is rewriting history tries to rebel by falling in love.” director=”Michael Radford” actor_1=”John Hurt” ]
