John Hughes

There's not much new you can really do with a high school comedy, but at least the notion of Owen Wilson playing a jakey posing as a bodyguard promises a few laughs and a half.

It's a decent enough family comedy, and there are a few laugh out loud moments, but they're spread too thin to make this a classic jape. The 3 bullied teens are hugely likable though, and Wilson has such an easygoing charm that it's difficult not to enjoy it, even if he does work better when he's got a proper sparring partner to riff off.

The end result is likable without being lovable, funny without being hilarious and enjoyable without being particularly memorable.

Was Jennifer Lopez going through an "I want to be Julia Roberts" phase in 2002? That was the year in which she made "Enough", a shameless rip-off of "Sleeping with the Enemy" and followed it up with "Maid in Manhattan", which bears a certain resemblance to another Roberts film, "Pretty Woman".

Like "Pretty Woman", this is a romantic comedy based upon a "poor girl loves rich man" storyline. The poor girl is Marisa Ventura, a divorcée with a ten-year-old son working as a maid in a smart Manhattan hotel. The rich man is Christopher Marshall, scion of a wealthy family and senatorial candidate staying as a guest in the hotel. Chris is, unexpectedly, a Republican, a detail presumably inserted in a bid to dispel those persistent rumours that Hollywood's main function is to act as the Democratic Party's amen corner. The two meet and are attracted to one another, but, owing to a misunderstanding, Chris believes that Marisa is Caroline Lane, a wealthy British socialite who is another guest at the hotel. Chris invites "Caroline Lane" to lunch, but he is confused when the real Caroline shows up instead of Marisa. Further complications ensue, including the real Caroline taking a fancy to Chris and Marisa losing her job, but this being a rom-com we know that true love will prevail in the end.

Jennifer Lopez has some dreadful films on her CV, especially the badly-written, badly-acted and thoroughly nasty "Enough", and the hilariously bad "Anaconda", a sort of fifties monster movie resurrected for the nineties. (I must admit I have never seen "Gigli", widely quoted as being the nadir of her career; if it is worse than either of those films it must be bad indeed). "Maid in Manhattan", however, is one of her better performances, not least because she enunciates all her lines clearly, something which is not always the case with her, and makes Marisa- hard-working, determined and caring- a very likable heroine.

Rather surprisingly, Ralph Fiennes, who is often at his best playing villainous characters as in "Schindler's List" or "The Duchess", makes an equally likable hero. The rather reserved Chris seems more like an English gentleman than an American politician; there is perhaps a hint that his desire for a seat in the Senate owes more to family tradition than to ideological commitment; both his father and grandfather were Senators before him. The real political animal is his frantically hyperactive spin doctor Jerry (played by Stanley Tucci, who had played a rather similar role the previous year in "America's Sweethearts"). There is an amusing, if somewhat one-dimensional, contribution from Natasha Richardson as the spoilt, bitchy Caroline. The acting honours were stolen, however, by young Tyler Posey, utterly delightful as Marisa's son Ty who plays a key role in bringing his mother and Chris together. Ty is a budding intellectual who has become something of an expert on the 1970s, especially the presidency of Richard Nixon.

I don't think that "Maid in Manhattan" is as good as "Pretty Woman", which had rather more in the way of character development and psychological depth. Garry Marshall's film gained a bit of extra edge by making its heroine a prostitute and its hero a businessman suffering a crisis of conscience about his less-than-ethical business methods. Marisa and Chris, by comparison, are just a bit too nice right from the beginning. Yet the film, as a whole, is an enjoyable one, if not a particularly original one. Besides "Pretty Woman" it also owes a debt to the Audrey Hepburn/Humphrey Bogart "Sabrina" and to countless other films, plays, novels and stories all the way back to "Cinderella" and beyond. Yet this lack of originality does not necessarily matter in a romantic comedy; the genre, after all, is a highly formulaic one which relies upon a few well-worn plots. What matters is the way in which the basic idea is developed, and "Maid in Manhattan" handles its theme with wit and humour. It's not exactly a realistic film either, but then rom-coms were never intended to be exercises in realism. It will provide enjoyable viewing for anyone looking for something romantic and escapist.

I loved this movie. Totally hilarious. Loved how the characters react to 21st century life style and brought with them their hilarious habits and way of life from the past. This movie is a must see!! We rented it and watched it five times in five days. Highly recommended for a great laugh! Andre is very funny and it is great to see him realize that he can be a free man and finally stand up for himself. It helps us realize how inhumane the treatment of "slaves" were in ancient history. Helps us realize how much we take for granted in the 21st century too. This movie is like a mix between Monty Python's Quest for the Holy Grail and Napoleon Dynamite, at least that is what type of satirical humor it reminds me of and I think both of those movies are absolutely hilarious as well, the kind that you like to watch again and again and find yourself quoting over and over and laughing. It was a great movie!!

Watchable first sequel to the surprise hit stars Charles Grodin and Bonnie Hunt as the reprising Newton family, whose slobbering Saint Bernard--Beethoven--gets himself a female doggie to make love with and produce tiny little doggies with. Problem: Two evil dognappers are chasing after the puppies.

Why do they want them? Well, why did Cruella Devil want puppies? Because they're villains.

A very poor movie, but compared to "Beethoven's 3rd, 4th" and "5th" this looks like a masterpiece.

2.5/5 stars -- mediocre but watchable sequel.

"Beethoven" isn't a great family film, but it is surprisingly sweet and amusing. It's one of those films that is strangely attracting, though you can't really understand why.

I think a lot has been built up on this film just because there were some sequel spin-offs that were more than horrible. (The 3rd and 4th sequels with Judge Reinhold were some of the worst attempts at comedy. Ever.) But the original was a nice, family-friendly film that accomplishes what it promised.

Charles Grodin plays George Newton: Family man, businessman, NOT a doggy-man. But things change rapidly when a runaway Saint Bernard named Beethoven comes to the Newton residence. Newton's children immediately get attached to the animal, but Grodin's character doesn't exactly like the fact of a big ol' slobbering dog being around his house. So there are some gags as Grodin gets mad at Beethoven for certain things he does throughout the film.

But then, evil animal vet Dean Jones tries to take Beethoven, and Newton decides to fight back for his family and bring the doggy back home.

"Beethoven" isn't anything very original, and it isn't anything very memorable, nor is it excellent quality gags. But it's a surprisingly pleasant and good-natured family film that doesn't resort to crude humor or language like other so-called "family films" out there.

Ivan Reitman, who has brought us "Ghostbusters," "Kindergarten Cop," and "Stripes" co-produced this film. He's a talented director, even if he sometimes makes average films. The thing about his films are, that even when they're average they are still pretty funny and strangely watchable. And though I'm not sure what all a producer does on a film, I think he probably did a good job with something on this film. :)

Charles Grodin is one of those actors that I've always liked because he seems very down-to-earth and regular. He is a subtle comedian that never goes OTT and doesn't come off like ANOTHER Jerry Lewis-Jim Carrey hybrid.

"Beethoven" isn't anything great, but it's strangely likable and enjoyable. When compared to other so-called family films, it's pretty nice. It doesn't skimp on the gags (even if they're not very great) and it never turns stupid (like the 3rd and 4th film).

All in all, "Beethoven" delivers what it promises, and it does it pretty nicely.

Made before Tommy Lee Jones became a big star it was quite obviously the inspiration for Pirates of the Caribbean. It was released in the UK under the title SAVAGE ISLANDS but in some places it was called NATE & HAYES. However, shame on Paramount for not exploiting it better. I know they had a lot riding on the not dissimilar Indiana Jones films but this is a cracking adventure and deserves better treatment (and why oh why has it not been seen on UK television for about 15 years?).

This is a very funny movie. Not as funny Christmas Vacation it sort of predecessor. The laughs excellently played, especially (Possibly spoiling) the Hoover Dam part (Please feel free to take any Dam pictures or ask any Dam questions). A definite must see.

My Christmas is filled with ritual, as I guess most people's are. Part of that ritual is National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation, about which I have nothing but good things to say. This should be part of your Holiday season too, because despite it not seeming like it all the way through, the film as a whole is just so thoroughly festive, cheery and good-hearted.

It opens with a great set-piece, Clark taking his family out in the "front-wheel drive sleigh" to dig their Christmas tree out of the snow-covered ground. He's a desperate loser, but you have to love the guy, working his butt off to give his extended family the perfect Christmas. (That's the difference in this Vacation movie, by the way - the Griswolds don't go anywhere, their folks come to them).

So the shenanigans finding a tree set the pattern for a season of chaos, fighting in-laws, squirrels, stupid relatives, huge dogs, snooty neighbours and collapsing turkeys. And as if that wasn't stress enough for poor Clark, he's waiting for his Christmas bonus to come through to cover a cheque he's already written.

The script brims with festive jollity, enthusing the audience with Clark's excitement for the holidays. Stand out moments include the welcome (and hilarious) return of Randy Quaid as Cousin Eddie, the uber-hick sponger with a trailer-full of weirdo kids and rubber sheets, and Mae Questel's appearance as Aunt Bethany. She used to voice Betty Boo, and plays the crazy old woman to perfection.

See this movie. Get it on video. I normally watch it the first time on a miserable October Sunday, when I start to think properly about Christmas. Nothing can replace this movie as the one thing guaranteed to get me looking forward to late December. Fabulous stuff, and as festive for me as tinsel and carols. Cuddle up with this one.

I'm surprised by all the negative. OK, so it's not a great work of art, but I thought it was side-splittingly funny in places, and cleverly parodies all the national stereotypes that people tend to use.

As a great fan of visual humour, my favourite moment in the film has to be the scene where, having had all their clothes stolen, the family go shopping in a boutique in Italy and emerge on to the street dressed in absurdly over-the-top designer creations. It really is one of the funniest sights I have ever seen in a film. I defy anyone with a sense of humour not to laugh.

Every summer Chevy Chase takes his family on a little trip. This year he went too far.

Chevy Chase stars as Clark Griswold, the typical American businessman. Well, almost a basic businessman. He works in food preservatives. Beverly D'Angelo plays his wife, Anthony Michael Hall plays Rusty, his teenage son, and Dana Barron plays his daughter Audrey . This summer, Clark has decided to go all out and take a vacation with his family to "Walley World," a theme park spoof on Disney World, owned by "Roy Walley".

Basically, this film starts out strong and ends strong. There are many gut grabbing scenes, and the film never resorts to gross out humor. The biggest gross out is when Clark bites into a sandwich a dog leaked on, but that's a different story.

Along the way to Walley World, everything and everything that can go wrong does, and Clark ends up with Aunt Edna (Imogene Coca), who adds more fun to this wallop of a comedy.

The laughter just escalates more and more as we see Clark's dreams flush down the toilet farther and farther, and I can't tell you how much I laughed at some of the scenes.

"Vacation" isn't typical National Lampoon fare.

Chevy Chase gives by far his best performance (akthough he acts just as well in "Christmas Vacation") as Clark, a real optimist, go get'm kind of guy, who completely snaps toward the end of the film. The rest of the cast does well, and Beverly D'Angelo does surprisingly well as a house wife. The two children, Audrey and Rusy, squawk at each other, but not to the point of obnoxious, which is another good thing about this film.

Is it no surprise that John Hughes, the king writer/director of the 80's comedy films wrote this, or that Harold Ramis (Groundhog Day, Ghostbusters, Striped, Analyze This) directed the film?

With cameos by the likes of John Candy, Eugene Levy, Brian Doyle Murray (who played Clark's boss in "Christmas Vacation"), and more, "Vacation" is a comedic triumph of the eighties that is now an icon of how to make a good comedy.

(some spoilers) John Hughes certainly helped personify the 1980s as writer and director! Although he didn't direct 'Mr. Mom', he hasn't directed a film in 14 years, which coincides when his writing in the 90s has seen him represent less iconic films and straight-to-video sequels. He wrote Mr. Mom, and although, not as significant or funny as 'The Breakfast Club' or 'Ferris Bueller's Day Off', it still represented a reasonably popular and somewhat iconic film on the gender role in the 1980s.

Michael Keaton plays Jack Butler, hard-working father of three children, who finds himself in a pickle when he and his colleagues are fired from his manufacturing car company. His wife, Caroline (Teri Garr), manages to get a job in advertising, and the roles are reversed so to speak. Nowadays, we might frown upon this being the premise for a comedy, but back in 1983, attitudes were different. Anyway, Jack finds himself learning the ropes of being the stay-at-home dad, while Caroline begins to excel selling tuna as her new boss Ron (Martin Mull from "Roseanne") begins to take more than liking! Jack finds goes from clueless Dad to successful parent, all the while avoiding the affections of a would-be lover, and trying to get his wife to remember the little things she misses while wrapped in work. He learns that pride in himself, and his family values are what's important, and not selling himself short to get a job back. Meanwhile, Caroline gets caught up in her work in more ways than one.

This early 80s comedy is quite funny, even though some stereotypes may not be accepted now. I'm sure most guys know how to shop for groceries without wrecking the store, however "clean up in isle?" was quite funny! And, of course, the whole letting yourself go in the unemployment rut and getting caught up in soap operas was also quite funny. Keaton does well with or without a beard, and Teri Garr was quite funny too. Christopher Lloyd is briefly in this movie, and Jeffrey Tambor is good as the disloyal employer. This is reasonably well directed and is Stan Dragoti's most popular film, but it's the writing and humorous commentary on social changes and gender roles that makes this film a winner, particular because John Hughes had a gift for writing good scripts in the 80s (I have no idea what happened in the 90s). And, most people see this as a John Hughes film, although he didn't direct it- but I guess it has his trademark. 'Mr. Mom' wouldn't work as well now in my opinion, although many gender-issue comedies have been made since. However, the workforce is no longer just a man's world, and vice versa. Still, 20 years ago, this film is pretty funny!

Personal taste rules when it comes to talking about movies such as this treasured little gem. Way back in the eighties, the early eighties, i discovered this movie, like so many released at the time, "Night Patrol" "Bad Manners" or even "King Frat" the artwork and blurbs on the back of the covers tempted and teased you.

Of course being of an age, movies like that i have already mentioned as well as stuff like "Screwballs" and the many others, captured the imagination, and thankfully many years later i still remember some with fondness and some with disdain the many movies that help maintain my love of such genre as parodies or pastiches.

Made many years after the huge success of "Animal House" and having seen how it had fared down through the years, I now know that there would be no way this movie would ever eclipse the box office bucks obtain aforementioned nor would it linger in the memory, much like that of National Lampoon's Vacation.

To be honest, not everything that has carried the National Lampoon Logo has been a wild success, however to me Class Reunion remains one of my all time favourite movies, with instantly recognisable characters, such as the aloof Bob Spinnaker played to perfection by Gerrit Graham, so good in Charles Band's "Terrorvision" still lingering in the past glories of his youth. Or how about Stephen Furst's brash and ballsy turn as the high school lazy drunken sex crazed bum Hubert Downs.

Sweet as. Which makes me ponder. As i already said, personal taste not withstanding. People can be so cruel, so it will never win any awards or be compared to the like of its's peers within the comedy world. It does have some merit. Being one of the earlier scripts penned by John Hughes, who would later go on to do one of my own favourites of his work "Weird Science" as well as having a wonderful theme title sung by the great Gary U.S Bonds.

What more can i say, it's a movie just waiting to be rediscovered, time and time again.

If you liked the first two films starring Macaulay Culkin, then the bad news is that he is replaced by a new kid named Alex D. Linz playing Alex Pruitt, but the good news is that this is actually a good film. The new idea is that he is left at home on purpose, looking after himself. Four criminals, Mr. Beaupre (Olek Krupa), Mr. Jernigan (Lenny Von Dohlen), Mr. Unger (David Thornton) and Alice Ribbons (Rya Kihlstedt), have stolen a computer chip that goes into a missile. They put it into a toy car and accidentally swap bags. The kid has now got the car and is now defending himself with new goofy and dangerous booby traps set for cartoon like comedy. Also starring Haviland Morris as the Mum, Karen, Kevin Kilner as the Dad, Jack, Marian Seldes as Mrs. Hess, Seth Smith as Stan, and a young Scarlett Johansson as Molly. The villains are good and the new kid is pretty good, oh, and the comedy is still good! Good!

An absent minded professor discovers a new type of rubber that can be harnessed as an energy source. However his discovery causes him to miss his wedding and lose his girlfriend. While trying to demonstrate his discovery to Sara Jean to win her back, he gets the attention of mobster Hoenicker who wants the discovery for himself.

The story here is unimportant - it's all a bit daft and if you look too closely at it, it all falls apart. For example - the professor has created a flying robot that has full intelligence and character but yet he hasn't made any money for himself or his college!, is the flubber alive or not? etc. But really it's all about the set pieces and the jokes. As such it falls down a little - it's good for kids but there's nothing in the crude slapstick for adults. Jokes include the usual "people getting hit in the head" style humour.

Williams character is not funny at all - a bit of a weakness in a comedy lead. In fact his forgetfulness is just stupid at times and doesn't have any charm to cover it. The funniest bits actually revolve around McDonald's Wilson - he doesn't get good lines but he has lots of incidental laughs. Ted Levine and Clancy Brown have both done better than this and are limited to comedy thugs - although both were probably glad to be in a big movie. Other well known faces include Raymond J. Barry and Wil Wheaton, although these are also underused. It's not really a movie about performances but I think it's still important.

The best characters are Weebo and the flubber. Weebo is quite funny and actually has a deep character - she's the secretary in love with her boss type - she also creates a strangely moving scene. The flubber is good - best in one big musical number halfway through and I wonder if they could have had more imaginative scenes with it as a character rather than just a bouncy ball.

Overall it's a kids film - don't expect anything more than that.

I thought that 101 Dalmations was brilliant to watch, the humour to the movie was laughable and great. I thought Glenn Close played a great part of playing that evil woman Cruella De Vil. I think Glenn Close is a brilliant actress and i thought she was good in both 101 and 102 Dalmations movies.

Richard Attenborough returned to acting after 14 years behind the camera in "Jurassic Park", and followed it swiftly by daring to challenge comparison with Oscar-winner Edmund Gwenn in this remake.

As a heartwarmer for those inadequates who won't sit through a 60-year-old monochrome movie-- albeit one which rivals "It's a Wonderful Life" as Hollywood's answer to "A Christmas Carol"-- this John Hughes revamp will probably serve. Anyhow, there are plenty of copies on sale at the checkout of my local supermarket. But it is a bit too laid-back and, latterly, too bogged down in argument for younger kids or older boys. It may warm more cockles among the grandparents.

The main thematic interest is how Hughes chooses to tweak the original screen story as adapted (unusually for the time) by the director, George Seaton. Whether he sought to or not, the remake has thrown up some intriguing twists for a more skeptical and secular time.

The oldie caught the mood of an America yearning to get back to normalcy amid the perils of the post-war, Cold War world. Location shooting in New York City, with much co-operation from Macys, gave a touch of realism to the fantasy, whereas in 1994 it's an imaginary store and (for Americans, at least) an incongruously "veddy British" claimant to the chair of Santa Claus- although his nationality is not the issue when the legal meanies of the State of New York try to get him confined to the bughouse.

What is striking is the judge's rationale for allowing Kris's plea for freedom. Because US bills have "In God We Trust" on them, he reasons, it means New York is allowed to have blind faith in the existence of a supernatural being who lays presents on 1.7 billion children in one night, operating from invisible workshops with reindeer which cannot be made to fly in a courtroom demonstration of his powers because it isn't Christmas Eve. Besides, the sneery prosecutor's kids were raised to believe in him, so there- case closed.

In real life the ACLU would be appealing such a judgement all the way to the Supreme Court for allowing too much religion into the law and the public square. "In God We Trust" was only put on the money during the Cold War, to cock a snook at "Godless bolshevism"; but this film is refreshingly disrespectful to the newer orthodoxy of playing down most Americans' beliefs in their films.

Kris asks if he should swear in the Bible, the Pope's ruling on Nicholas's sanctity is debated, and the ethos is quietly but unmistakably Christian. No "spiritual" Santa or "Happy Holidays" here. In a very light fashion, the film does revolve issues of how far it is legitimate to maintain a metaphor as a source of inspiration when rationalism of the Dawkins and Hitchens strain is sniping at it. The screenplay also looks quite beadily at the way commercial operators use holy myth to make money, even if the message comes muted from Hollywood.

That is the good news. There's plenty to carp at as well.

Attenborough's quiet, gentle but firm performance (most atypical of one who spent his previous acting time mainly playing unreliables or martinets) suffuses the film. He gets little competition, save from the contrasted crustiness of Windom. Most of the support is so-so, on the level of a Yuletide TV special, and not excluding little Wilson as the girl who has faith in Mr Kringle's claim to be St Nicholas. She is no Margaret O'Brien, if no worse in her way than the kewpie-doll Natalie Wood. In fact, she's a John Hughes moppet who did little later and nothing since 2000.

The narrative's departures from the well shaped original are no help. Once off the legal hook, Kris, wearing a brown suit, just disappears-- we don't see any triumphal sleigh ride to bid him adieu-- while attention shifts to a ridiculous post-midnight-mass impromptu wedding in a Catholic church. Then follows a trip out to a dream house in the snowy country, ushered by a silly salesman. The film does not seem to know when to call a halt, and there's not so much as Clarence's tinkling bell to bring back Kris at the close. It's as if the whole object of the exercise was to unite two bland characters in matrimony.

Baby's Day out is pure fun. If you like movies where young children outwit stupid grown-ups then this is the movie for you.

Joe Mantegna performs wonderfully as the leader of a trio of kidnappers who kidnap Baby Bink but soon find him causing more trouble than they can handle. If you liked films such as Home Alone then this movie will suit you.

There are wonderful scenes throughout. Baby Bink escapes his captors and starts crawling round the city and oddly, not one single adult seems to think this is out of the ordinary. The fun is seeing the blundering trio try to recapture him. There are some great moments, particularly when Baby Bink ends up in the gorilla cage at the zoo and when the trio arouse the suspicions of a policeman and Joe Mantegna hides Bink under a coat on his lap.

Whilst children will really enjoy this movie, adults will also get a kick out of it. Worth viewing if you can.

I saw this film when it first came out I was 7 years old and I loved it then and still do so I'm pleased to have finally bought it on DVD. Just watch it!!! I found it funny throughout and the end of the film where the villain (played beautifully) suffered at the unknowing hands of Dennis is a joy to watch. Just watch it!!!.

With Macaulay Culkin, Joe Pesci, Daniel Stern, Catherine O'Hara and John Heard with Tim Curry Kevin is back, but this time, after he is left on the wrong plane, he ends up in New York, after another fight with his parents. He is left to fend for himself in the Big Apple?but he is prepared. He has his father's credit cards to keep him going, and as he checks into the world famous Plaza Hotel, the movie just gets funnier and funnier. The robbers return, and Kevin picks out one house and booby traps it?and what follows is another whole slew of hilarity as he fools the crooks a second time.

But once again, Kevin realizes that a family is a very important thing to have during the holidays, and he hopes to be with the family he loves and hates once more. Very touching and quite funny, you shouldn't miss Home Alone II. I find it much more enjoyable than the original, but you might have a different opinion.

This is simply the greatest Humour movie ever.

Most people would call it a comedy, and boy it certainly is, but it is so much more than that. Sure, on the surface it is brilliant slapstick with scenes so hysterically funny they make you roll off your chair. If ever there was a laugh-aloud movie this is it, and it ranks right up there with classics like Blazing Saddles, Return of the Pink Panther and Monty Python's Holy Grail. Even if it didn't go any deeper than this, Steve Martin and John Candy perform a comic feat that wouldn't put Laurel and Hardy to shame.

But the strength of the movie is that just below this surface it plays out a very human drama. The two main characters, Neal Page (Steve Martin) and Dale Griffith (John Candy) are polar opposites. Neal is introvert, anal retentive, arrogant and ambitious, a typical stressed-out corporate middle-manager who works in New York away from his family in Chicago. Dale is a simple salesman, obese, extravert, uninhibited, a social animal with friends in every town. They find themselves bound together by fate on a journey from New York to Chicago two days before Thanksgiving where everything that can possibly go wrong does go wrong.

As you would expect, the involuntary close relation of such disparate characters initially causes massive friction. Neal can't stand Dale's physical presence nor his endless pointless chatter, Dale is not impressed by Neal's arrogant stiffness and his not-so-subtle attempts to get rid of him. Yet, they need each other to reach their objective and they know it. Some brilliant scenes play out this confrontation, but in the end they come to grudingly accept each other, and through their trials and tribulations on the road acceptance even grows into something resembling a budding respect. Steve Martin and John Candy are fantastic, their chemistry fuels the movie and raises it to a level well above standard comedy.

*************** Spoilers ahead *********************** But the film goes deeper yet. At the next level, there is underlying tragedy that both characters try to hide in their day to day existence. It turns out that Dale has lost his wife eight years before, and has in fact been wandering and travelling throughout the country without ever going back home. He is effectively homeless and lives in cheap hotels and motels out of a trunk (which by the way also acts as a very effective comic prop), but he never discloses this to Neal. His life contains a great emotional emptiness but he can't really face up to it and he pretends to be a happily married man. Neal, on the other hand, is so self-obsessed with his career that he sacrifices the love for his family to the point where his wife becomes mistrusting of what is going on. Here is a man who risks losing what really matters for the sake of shallow success. He vaguely understands that something is going wrong but can't get himself to admit it or even pause and think about it.

It is only when the two of them get paired up that they come to realise what is wrong with themselves. Dale is confronted with Neal's family life, a life that he himself so sorely misses, and Neal realises in the end that life is about more than himself and that other people do matter. At the conclusion of the film they come together and fulfill each other's needs, becoming whole in the process.

This is buddy movie/ road flick supreme. The tragedy underlying the superficial slapstick makes this film Humour with a Capital H, much more so than the great comedies I mentioned before. You will have to go back to the likes of Charles Chaplin and Buster Keaton to find anything comparable.

However, and this is where the true greatness lies, in the final analysis this film is not about the drama of two different characters at all, but about the opposing forces struggling within each of us ourselves. We all have a Neal and a Dale side, apparent opposites that cannot exist together, but only by accepting this and giving both sides equal weight can we become whole human beings. The film shows that this may at first appear an impossible task, frought with risk and danger, but if we persevere it can be done, and the prize of healing ourselves is worth it.

Hilarious comedy, superb drama and ground truth - few movies would even dare to try and combine these themes. Planes, trains and automobiles does, and it succeeds brilliantly. Martin and Candy deliver stellar performances that work at all of these levels. Definitely one of the best movies ever, and vastly underrated.

This is an excellent movie. Ed O'Neil is very good. The movie is mainly about the relationship that builds between the spoiled rich son of O'Neil's girlfriend and Ed O'Neil's bluecollar character. It kind of reminds me of another film written by John Hughes, the John Candy/Steve Martin movie 'Planes, Trains, & Automobiles'. Both movies are about the various mishaps that occur between the two lead characters while on a cross county trip. O'Neil shows that he has much more going for him then being 'Al Bundy'(not that there's anything wrong with that). I have seen him in a number of films and he is good doing drama as well as comedy. If you are a fan of John Hughes movies, such as: Vacation, Ferris Bueller, Some Kind Of Wonderful, Uncle Buck, and Home Alone, to name a few, than you will like this movie

A wonderfully light RomCom that stands as one of the best tributes to John Candy (alongside Uncle Buck).

Though, this is a comedy, it still allows Candy to show his true acting skills, and many of the choicest comedy moments go to Maureen O'Hara as Candy's mother, who almost steals the film.

It is a sad trait in Hollywood theory which appears to dictate that comediens can't do serious acting and so should never be given serious roles, yet many have proved this to be wrong. John Candy himself proved it in JKF, Dan Aykroyd did in Driving Miss Daisy, and Robin Williams has done it on numerous occasions.

This could of been a Hughes all time classic, I enjoyed it right up to the part Whaley stopped parading around in his underwear, (oh this sick mind of mine.) I'll say it loud and clear to everyone who has failed to realize it, " Whaley Rules! ". I think this movie loses what ever it had going for it, when a straight forward plot, which leads to lotsa dead writing, and a film that seems rushed together to make air time. This could have been a wonderful impromptu, since Whaley is a natural riot, and Connely can hold her own. But instead we get a lesson in bad writing, crippled production, and wasted casts. Oh what this could have been.

Home Alone' has succeeded in establishing itself as a Christmas tradition, spawning off three sequels (including a made-for-television flop), and a whole franchise in and of it.

Macaulay Culkin plays Kevin McCallister, the average American child. He has an attitude almost expected of a Chris Columbus film from the eighties. He lives with a large family, which, right now, being around Christmas time, is about quadrupled, flooded by relatives' children, all of whom pick on poor, poor Kevin (sympathy long lost later into the film).

One day Kevin wakes up from his sleep to find his wish has come true: his parents (John Heard and Catherine O'Hara) have disappeared. Enthralled by this, he proceeds to do everything and anything he was not allowed to do before, including eating ice cream in the morning, watching violent gangster films, jumping on the bed, wrecking his brother's room, and having some fun with a BB gun. Unfortunately for Kevin, his parents have not just disappeared - they have accidentally left him at home before going to Paris!

Trouble really starts when two pesky burglars, Harry Lime (Joe Pesci) and Marv Merchants (Daniel Stern), decide that their next burglary will be at the McCallister residence. Little do they know Kevin is more than prepared, arming the house with an array of booby-traps that would impress top spies in the American government.

John Hughes, writer/director/producer of my favorite comedy, 'Planes, Trains and Automobiles,' wrote this film, and it is no wonder. It is just like Hughes' humor. It mixes emotion, belly laughs and a warm-hearted ending all into one little bundle called a movie. John Hughes' films, in my experience, are usually very good, mainly because he approaches films at a very classic level. He doesn't resort to crude, kid jokes, like 'The Master of Disguise' or 'The Tuxedo,' to name a few recent flops. He almost always levels everything out perfectly in his scripts, and nothing is different here. Also, he places Kevin and co. in a large brick home in a large neighborhood in Chicago; a home that very much resembles those in 'Planes.' and 'Uncle Buck' (I would not be surprised if it is the same home).

As for the acting.

Macaulay Culkin is not at his best here. His best performance would have to be in an earlier John Hughes film named 'Uncle Buck,' where he had more of a cute charm than an acting charm. Here, he could barely act his way out of a plastic bag. Fortunately, with great performances by John Heard, Catherine O'Hara, Pesci and Stern, his bad acting is long forgotten by the time we become absorbed into the film.

John Heard and Catherine O'Hara bring Kevin's parents to life. They seem almost complete opposites. Kevin's father, Peter (Heard), is very calm and laidback. His mother, Kate (O'Hara) is extremely nervous almost all the time, fretting throughout the film. She is aggravated very easily and, like all mothers, her instinctive nature to care for her child is what drives her to the point she goes to in the film.

And then there's Pesci and Stern. My favorite lot of the film. They perfectly blend humor, pain and aggravation to the film.

Pesci's character Harry is very strict, easily agitated and picks on Marv for a great many things. Marv, the stereotypical 'tall, stupid one,' is completely stupid. He does things that would make a hamster blush. Yet he is the character I have found many like the most, mainly because he is so stupid you have to feel sorry for him. Stern brings a great trait to the character of Marv, and I am very pleased he got the part. It's a hard choice to decide which baddie is better, so I just say I like them both the same.

All in all, 'Home Alone' is probably the best Christmas movie to rise out of the film industry in the last twenty years. It seamlessly blends humor, pain, emotion, human instinct and some great booby-traps all into one little bundle. This film has stood the test of time greatly.

And I mean no-brainer in the best possible sense! It seems whenever I'm down, Dad shoots out to HMV and picks me up a nice, cheesy 80s movie out of the £5 section - this time it was The Great Outdoors and boy, did it cheer me up! A major reason to love this movie is, of course, dearly departed John Candy who is impossible to dislike. In this film he plays Chet Ripley, a wholesome family man who has his vacation ruined by the in-laws crashing in uninvited. It is not just Candy who puts in a fine performance. Dan Ackroyd is great as sleazy, posing, Roman Craig - a semi yuppy with a penchant for barbecued lobster tails and trimming his nostrils! Annette Bening is also convincing as Kate Craig, Roman's spoiled but lonely wife. Yes, she is also the mum from American Beauty - I squawked this rather loudly while watching. Her role here is far simpler, but she is still on top form with some hilarious lines - spin cycle, anyone?! Stephanie Faracy comes across as pleasant and extremely likable in the role of Connie Ripley, and the kids in the movie are great - I thought the youngest boy Benny was especially funny, especially in the 'bear dump' scene. The film starts and continues brilliantly - not having a plot as such - but this is actually a good thing. Rather than bogging us down in a story we're rather presented with a series of highly amusing set - pieces: the hysterical water ski scene. The bear dump. The old man's birthday. Chet's 'Bear Story'. The bat swatting. The leech scene. I could go on but I simply wouldn't have time. This film works fabulously as this series of 'short stories' - it's almost like a character study, and the effect is great, so one wonders why John Hughes had to write in the tacky subplot of older boy Buck's dalliance with local tart-with-a-heart Cammie. It's dull fare, all in all, and Buck would be a perfectly likable character without the teen angst bit to go with it. The boredom of Buck mooching around with his sweetheart to the strains of cheese-guitar could have been cut down - or preferably cut out all together, leaving more room for developing other, shorter scenes - like the go-kart racing at the fun centre, or the pony trek through the woods. I'm sure I'm not alone in wishing these parts of the film had been made longer. The film also flags a bit towards the end when the 'moral' of the tale comes out, and Roman and Chet have to do a silly death-dash through the woods after Roman's daughters. This again seems like John Hughes feeling he has to do his duty in giving us a bit of all-American schmaltz but it would've been great without it. All in all, a very funny, light movie to pick you up when you feel down. Oh, and the raccoons are a nice touch!

This is the best of the eighties 'US High School/Teen Angst' movies. There were loads, but none to match this one. There's a character in here for each of you to associate with, be it the nerdy Keith, with the bossy younger sister and the unattainable crush, or Duncan, the kind-hearted skinhead. If you only ever watch two of these movies again, make them 'The Breakfast Club' and this one.

This is a typical teen dilemma story at its heart, one which I somewhat suspect I watched far more often than is healthy when I was a young boy aged six or so. Guys be warned - that's what having a sister who is eight years older gets you when you're growing up... Anyway, I'm sure this film added to my gender confusion as a kid and turned me into the mild-mannered softie that I am today!

Having to watch it so often during the early stages of my development might have been far more damaging to me if everything about the film didn't suggest that its heart was in the right place. John Hughes was lucky enough to have a fantastic cast gathered together who help to breathe life into his writing. Ringwald especially was a terrific teen actress to snag for this type of material, because there was no-one who could do 'vulnerable' better than her at the time. If the audience connects with your lead character then it gradually becomes a trickle-down effect, which must be a tremendous help for the supporting players, too. Throw in Andrew McCarthy at the height of his powers before his career went into free-fall, plus sidekick duties performed by a young and zany Jon Cryer, and that's a winning trio you have. It doesn't matter that the crises don't add up to much when you think about it, as long as they're sold to us in a way we can identify with.

So far so snug, then. The only glitch appears in the resolution, where our heroine is encouraged to give up her individuality and that of her friend as a way for her to be finally accepted into 'the cool crowd'... What?! That isn't a fairytale ending, it's a graceful swan-dive toward conformity! It's not a message I expected Hughes to be advocating, and it taints the wholesomeness of the tale a little bit. Aside from that blip so close to the finishing line, however, this is an unashamedly feel good movie that won't corrupt impressionable young minds and is a unisex bit of fun. (Or at least that very last part is what I tell myself, anyway... :-) )

Excellent film and I really enjoyed it. I agree with all the other people that this is a really great film. I doubt my rating will help matters but we'll see. It's a shame we haven't seen Porter in anything since this film. My only qualm is if they might have cut down slightly on the comedy, but it was still a great film. I wondered why this hadn't got a higher rating. Just shows, doesn't it?

There isn't really much to be said about Uncle Buck. It is very good but it is a simple little film, one of those nice films to watch on a Sunday afternoon without having to rack your brain or think too hard.

The late John Candy excels here as Buck Russell who at first glance is a slob and without much going for him. However, as the film goes on, we learn that Uncle Buck does indeed have a heart. The film really is about a guy who looks like the type of man you would keep your family away from but who is in fact a guy with a heart of gold.

I recommend Uncle Buck to anyone who fancies watching a nice simple little film for the whole family to enjoy. And watch out for the scene with the drunken clown on the doorstep!

If you haven't seen this lovely little film yet, and you are due to be a young family man, I recommend it. Watch it with you significant other, and dare to try and not shed a tear, both laughing and really crying. If you're an 80's music fan, there's simply another great reason to love this film. Plus, Hughes uses fantasy outakes in a way few people had done prior to Ally Macbeal. It renders what could have been a generally typical, boring "chick-flick" a decently entertaining picture.

With a name like Ferris Bueller, you just know you can't be dealing with your typical rebellious teen. Our humble narrator doesn't drink, doesn't swear, doesn't take drugs and isn't rude to his parents.

So what is wrong with him? Well, he has skipped school a record 9 times and is now coaxing his sick friend Cameron Frye into tagging along. So ground him. All he wants to do is open Cameron's eyes to world and show him that there is no reason to be scared of his jerk of a father. To do so, however, would mean that Mr Frye's sacred Ferrari must be used.

There's the MacGuffin, as Hitchcock would call it. The car is Cameron's first step to scorning his father's wishes, of setting the truancy plot in motion, and giving it the extra edge.

What makes the excursion double fascinating is that school Principal Ed Rooney is gunning only for Ferris' blood. No one else, even Ferris' overtly trusting parents, suspect Ferris for a second, his school friends believing that he is close to dying and urgently requires a kidney donor.

Above all, he is just too damn cool and smart to get caught. He thoroughly believes in his actions and even looks forward to college at one stage. Imagine Woody Allen as an impish teenager, and you've got Ferris Bueller. Like Allen, Ferris even talks to the camera once in a while, preaching his word about living a little, so as to prevent an unhappy marriage and future.

So likable this Ferris. He could so easily be a narcissist, but he really does care about his friend Cameron and loves his girlfriend Sloane. No way can Sloane be left to rot in boring history class while Ferris and Cameron are out getting high in the city. So charmless is that teacher. So utterly devoid of spirit and character.

Not like Ferris. You can learn much worthier life lessons from Ferris Bueller, like knowing how to cover all your tracks so you never get caught. No one can find out you're wagging school, or you may never graduate.

First things first, and that means running down your school absences from 9 to 2. It must be done from home. Just remember to be grateful that your parents bought you a computer and not a car. After all, your best friend has a Ferrari in his dad's garage which is always available.

Next, you've got to call the school and arrange for Sloane to leave. Even if it means getting Cameron to lie about her dead grandmother. Well, it is for a good cause. We wouldn't want Rooney suspecting that Ferris has talked both his closest friends into wagging.

How will it work? Cameron can pretend to be Mr Peterson on one line and Ferris can call on another line to explain his absence. There's no way that Rooney will suspect that Ferris could be both people. Oh yeah, there's Ferris' mum too. She may come home for lunch to check on Ferris. What then? That i won't give away...

Sounds fun doesn't it? How two guys and a girl decide to wag school one day and avoid getting pinched. It is, and the reason is good execution. Writer/Director John Hughes scored the previous year with another classic teen comedy "The Breakfast Club" and clearly knows his genre very well.

"Ferris Bueller" is beguiling, light-hearted, unpredictable and inventive. In different hands, it may not have been. The lead character may have been some dumb shmuck who would eventually get exposed and learn the error of his ways. Or there may have been an excess of back-story detailing his character.

The performances here are uniformly excellent. The zealous Matthew Broderick clearly relishes his role as the witty teen; Alan Ruck is just as interesting as his cautious, world-weary friend Cameron who eventually lightens up and 'kills' his father's beloved car, and Mia Sara is eternally divine as his devoted girlfriend.

Elsewhere, other supporting roles work and only two disappoint. Jennifer Grey as Ferris's sister Jean suffers in the same way Cameron does. She cannot find any joy in her life and is openly disdainful of her more popular brother. Through bizarre circumstances, she also lightens up and forgives her brother, even aiding his scheme at one stage.

Perhaps intended, Jeffrey Jones just doesn't convince as the desperate principle out to dent Ferris' future and his sourpuss secretary (Edie McClurg) is even less convincing, with little to say or do.

In a slapstick subplot, Rooney attempts to catch Ferris cold by breaking into his home. All manner of mayhem ensues, leading to his undoing. Despite the slight concept and such farcical moments, "Ferris Bueller" remains one of the definitive teen movies.

Who can possibly not revel in the joy of adolescence, when the teen protagonist sings The Beatles' "Twist and Shout" on a moving podium, in the company of hundreds of fanatical people and not once think his old man could spot him?

Weird Science is the product of the prolific '80s' writer/director John Hughes (who later went on to create films such as 'Home Alone'). This man single-handedly crafted movies about teenagers for teenagers, without ever becoming patronising or authoritative. Weird Science epitomises the 80s with its fast cars, shoulder pads and big hair. To be honest, Weird Science is synonymous with that decade and reflects most if not all, of its hopes and aspirations (computers in every home, robotic servants etc.). Looking back on it now it's incredibly dated, however and more importantly, the film is still as entertaining today as it was over ten years ago!

Anyone who grew up in the 80s and is beginning to reminisce will instantly relate to the exploits of the two lead characters Gary (Anthony Michael Hall) and Wyatt (Ilan Mitchell-Smith), as they use their computer and associated paraphernalia to create a beautiful girlfriend (Kelly LeBrock). Although not Hughes' best work, this was reserved (in my opinion) for the later 'Ferris Beuller's Day Off' which was far more appealing to a wider audience - Weird Science will always be a 'Geeky' 80s classic. The film was so popular it spawned it's own TV series - ten years later!

Unless you lived through that decade the film won't touch you in quite the same way. You needed to have been in awe of Tron, to have worn stone washed jeans and to have owned at least two pairs of illuminous [odd] socks, to really appreciate the naivety of the main characters as they place their faith in computers and 'modern' technology.

Today to a younger - more clued up audience, Weird Science could get lost amongst so many other 80s flicks with inferior technology and visual special FX to today's CGI standards. However there is something quintessentially 80s, something oh so Duran Duran about Weird Science that separates it from even the best of today's films. It's that central 'Hughes' element with its visual nuances and audible gags that makes this a timeless classic, watchable again and again.

If you know what 'ghetto blaster' is definitely watch this film, if you were born after 1984 take everything with a pinch of salt and pay attention - you might learn something.

This film is one of the most influential films I have ever watched. It reaches out to you - and your touched by it. No matter what little sub-culture you were shifted into whilst going through the trials and tribulations of Secondary school you could relate to it.

It may have been clichéd but what film isn't, we like certain elements we can relate to otherwise what would we take from films.

Judd Nelson gives a convincing performance of 'Bender' the criminal. He managed to sway from angry to emotional - making you feel for him when he is describing what things are like at 'his house'. He seemed to have a lot of great lines including the Manilow comment! The emotion in this film is immense considering it is a teenage film - and touches on 5 lost characters who seem to be searching for some type of approval or acceptance. (Just like our-selves) Ringwald shows just how versatile she is, and very different from Pretty in Pink. I heard that Ally Sheedy originally went for Ringwalds part and they swapped?

Emilio Estevez carrys his role off very well as a Jock - it gets a little cringe worthy when hes high at the end - and rushing around like a loony. But the end with Ally Sheedy certainly makes up for it.

The ending is good, however even ten years later after I first saw this film I always wanted to know what they did the next day!

This is such a great film, I can relate to it so much! I love it is truly the best, you can watch over and over and never get tired of it.

Samantha Baker's opening line bemoaning her breast size. And that one dry observation is just the beginning of Samantha's hellish 16th birthday in Sixteen Candles, the debut feature from that king of the teen movies John Hughes.

Sixteen Candles is very special for the simple reason that John Hughes showed other filmmakers of the day what a teen movie could be all about. Instead of an orgy of sex, booze and all night partying, films starring teenagers could be about real people. Young people with problems of their own. Fears. Insecurities. And a healthy dollop of angst.

Sixteen Candles takes all of those qualities and makes a surprisingly fun film out of it. Even at the start of his career, John Hughes has made a film that's buoyant, brimming with confidence and delightfully dotty. Its everything a teen film should be.

The film that put Molly Ringwald on the map shows off her budding talent (if not her breasts!). She really is quite wonderful in the role of Samantha because she must encapsulate a lot of emotions. Especially when the emotions of those around her are particularly running high.

Even though its Samantha's birthday, her family are much more preoccupied with her elder sister Ginny's wedding. They completely forget that its her birthday. If that weren't bad enough, Samantha's high school crush Jake doesn't even know she exists. She's being hounded by "The Geek" (a sex-starved Anthony Michael Hall), and she's been lumbered with a Chinese foreign exchange student. And there's a party to go to.

Sixteen Candles is quite a breezy film. Its a very confident debut for John Hughes. There are touches that would become hallmarks for Hughes. Carefully etched characters. His ear for teenspeak. And quirkiness. Hughes is known for having a certain quirky touch but in Sixteen Candles it really goes into overdrive. And that may be the film's only fault.

Yes its a very funny film to be sure. But sometimes it feels like Hughes is more interested in springing the next oddball quirk on us than getting on and telling the story. The film is downright crazy at times. TV themes on the soundtrack (if well employed). Surreal images. There were times when these little curiosities quite wore me out.

Every scene has something odd about it. Except one. The scene where Samantha's father Jim (Paul Dooley) sits her down and apologises for missing out on what may have been the most important birthday in Samantha's life. Its the one scene in the whole film where Hughes forgets about being nutty and concentrates on the characters themselves. Hughes is always at his best when he directs his own scripts, and this scene in particular really shines.

Jim and Samantha actually feel like a real father and daughter. He doesn't quite connect on her level, but he senses her problems and offers to be a sympathetic ear, if not a solution to them. A wonderful scene brilliantly written and performed to perfection by Dooley and Ringwald.

There is an actual plot going on throughout all the wackiness Hughes has let loose. And Ringwald is at the centre of it. This may in fact be her best performance. Not only because it feels like her truest film character, but she is exactly the same age as Samantha. 16. And that's why Ringwald so completely identifies with Samantha so perfectly.

The film also has a very appealing list of co-stars around the edges of the story. At the head of the line is Anthony Michael Hall, suitably geekish without actually looking like a geek. At least he doesn't wear the thick glasses and lots of zits that crop up in many a teen movie's list of stereotypes.

Hall wants to nail Samantha, the girl of his dreams so he can score points with all his geek pals. But in a surprisingly sweet scene, the two open up to each other instead. Its a moment where Hughes changes tack, and their relationship rotates from testy to understanding. Samantha confides in Hall her problems and being unlucky in love, and "The Geek" quite surprisingly offers to help out in a way that doesn't feel contrived at all.

There are lots of neat little cameos from a few early risers. Look out for brother and sister John & Joan Cusack. John forms a part of the "Geek Trio", and although Joan walks through the film sporting an unsightly neck brace, she shows her considerable talent for physical comedy without having to do much of anything. Just the sight of her in that thing is worth the price of admission alone!

Kramer vs Kramer star Justin Henry is perfectly horrid as Samantha's brattish brother Mike. Haviland Morris is perfectly bitchy as Jake's Prom Queen girlfriend Caroline, and Gedde Watanabe perfectly wacky as Long Duk Dong, the Chinese exchange student. His antics may seem offensive to some nitpickers, but since he looks like he's having so much fun, who cares?

Michael Schoeffling is a bit on the bland side as Jake, but the way he and Samantha come together is still quite nice. John Hughes would continue to improve in the teen genre with greater and greater hits. But the sight gags, witty performances and sharp dialogue ensure Sixteen Candles will always remain a classic.