Product Details
ASIN : 630310696X
Customers who bought this goods also bought.
Editorial Reviews
From Amazon.co.uk
Philadelphia wasn't the first movie about AIDS (it followed such worthy independent films as Parting Glances and Longtime Companion), but it was the first Hollywood studio picture to take AIDS as its primary subject. In that sense, Philadelphia is a historically important film. As such, it's worth remembering that director Jonathan Demme (Melvin and Howard, Something Wild, The Silence of the Lambs) wasn't interested in preaching to the converted; he set out to make a film that would connect with a mainstream audience. And he succeeded. Philadelphia was not only a hit, it also won Oscars for Bruce Springsteen's haunting "The Streets of Philadelphia," and for Tom Hanks as the gay lawyer Andrew Beckett who is unjustly fired by his firm because he has AIDS. Denzel Washington is another lawyer (functioning as the mainstream-audience surrogate) who reluctantly takes Beckett's case and learns to overcome his misconceptions about the disease, about those who contract it, and about gay people in general. The combined warmth and humanism of Hanks and Demme were absolutely essential to making this picture a success. The cast also features Jason Robards, Antonio Banderas (as Beckett's lover), Joanne Woodward, and Robert Ridgely, and, of course, those Demme regulars Charles Napier, Tracey Walter and Roger Corman. --Jim Emerson
Amazon.com Essential Video
Philadelphia wasn't the first movie about AIDS (it followed such worthy independent films as Parting Glances and Longtime Companion), but it was the first Hollywood studio picture to take AIDS as its primary subject. In that sense, Philadelphia is a historically important film. As such, it's worth remembering that director Jonathan Demme (Melvin and Howard, Something Wild, The Silence of the Lambs) wasn't interested in preaching to the converted; he set out to make a film that would connect with a mainstream audience. And he succeeded. Philadelphia was not only a hit, it also won Oscars for Bruce Springsteen's haunting "The Streets of Philadelphia," and for Tom Hanks as the gay lawyer Andrew Beckett who is unjustly fired by his firm because he has AIDS. Denzel Washington is another lawyer (functioning as the mainstream-audience surrogate) who reluctantly takes Beckett's case and learns to overcome his misconceptions about the disease, about those who contract it, and about gay people in general. The combined warmth and humanism of Hanks and Demme were absolutely essential to making this picture a success. The cast also features Jason Robards, Antonio Banderas (as Beckett's lover), Joanne Woodward, and Robert Ridgely, and, of course, those Demme regulars Charles Napier, Tracey Walter, and Roger Corman. --Jim Emerson
Customer Reviews
The Oscar Winning Philadelphia with Hanks (2004-07-02)  March was Oscar month, and TCM (Turner Classic Movies) who showcase great Oscar movied showed ''Philadelphia'' with Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington . ''Philadelphia'' is the powerful movie about a well educated and hardworking lawyer named Andy Beckette who contracts AIDS and is then illegally and prejudicely fired from his law firm when they find out he has AIDS. The movie is nothing short of Excellent demonstrating not only the cold-blooded and hypocritical members of corporte society, but the indignities and prejudices that people living with AIDS have to go through. The movie also brilliantly shows the courtroom tactics and lies that defendants and lawyers will use in order to win their case. The Defense (who represents the Law Firm who fired Andy Beckette) tries to make Andy Beckett's lifestyle and often times varying performances at work against him to try to bring down his reputation and his case. From a law point of view, the movie is Excellent. From a Film making point of view, the movie is Excellent. From a societal message , point of view, ''Philadelphia'' is Excellent. Jason Robards, plays Charles Wheeler, a sickening, prejudice man who resembles the most disgusting corporate boss there is: The corporate boss, who pretends to be friends with his coworkers or clients, only to stabbed them in the back later. He will do only anything to benefit himself. At the beginning, Wheeler pretends to be Andy's friend, heck he even ask him for legal advice on a special antitrust case called ''Highlite vs. Sander Systems''. Andy Beckett's becomes fired, from the job, once they find out he has aids, but try to make it look he was fired for other reasons. The movie also greatly shows the prejudices, and misconception people have about aids. However, Director Jonathan Demme does bring up some controversial areas for example Andy was a guy with many sexual partners, and so his diagnosis of the Aids Virus while dating Miguel Alvarez (Antonio Banderas) is not surprisingat all. In fact the defense uses Andy's personal history against him very well. Denzel Washington plays Jospeh Miller, the lawyer Beckette eventually to try to bring his AIDS case to court. Miller himself, at first, displays his own prejudices against people with AIDS. When Beckette, touches items in his office, his face becomes terrified, showing his fear and ignorance that perhaps he will catch AIDS from Beckette. Another gritty scene that shows people ignorance and prejudice is the library scene in which Andy Beckette, is conducting researching for his AIDS case against the lawfirm that illegally fired him. The librarian in the library, first asks Andy Beckette, if he would be more comfortable in a study room, but then it becomes evident that the the ignorant librarian is telling not asking Andy Beckette to go to another room. Andy being, a very proud man, refuses showing his true dignity even while having AIDS. Joseph Miller (Washington) eventually agrees to become Andy's lawyer and this is where more powerful scenes are shown along with brilliant and well scripted performances. ''Justice is blind regardless of color, sex and religion.'' is the line that the Judge in the case uses to ensure the parties involved that this will be a fair case. ''Philadelphia'' gathered many Oscar Nominations including Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor leading to Denzel Washington winning for Best Actor. ''Philadelphia'' is not the only movie that deals with the issue of AIDS, but it is by far one of the best made. I Highly Recommended this movie for both educational reasons (educate people about AIDS along with the ignorant misconception people have about it), and for Journalistic and Filmmaking reasons. An Oscar worthy film that has to be seen. There is a dvd available for ''Philadelphia'' but unfortunately no, special features are given but still a great film.
Hear Springsteen's and Neil Young's songs, then press STOP (2004-05-20)  "Philadelphia" is Hollywood's pathetic, hygienic attempt to deal with the maelstrom of controversy surrounding AIDS. It just doesn't want to offend anyone. (Even the Talking Heads's song "Heaven," heard in one scene, has its "heaven is a place where nothing ever happens" lyric rendered not so offensive.) The performances of Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington are noteworthy, but the film refuses to fully explore how AIDS can lay waste to a person's body, mind, and relationships. Does our main character's family and friends struggle with an admixture of hatred, disgust, pity, and sorrow for their infected son? Of course not! That would be too real for the suburban megaplex crowd and for the gay community. No, in "Philadelphia," the AIDS victim's family and friends are supportive until the end. Who's the bad guy? Well, it's our hero's employer, whose somewhat understandable fears of a ravaging syndrome (which was not fully understood in 1993) being introuduced in the workplace are portrayed as malicious. The subject of AIDS is a powderkeg, but in "Philadelphia," it seems about as controversial as cancer.
Good movie, too preachy in areas (2004-05-13)  I finally got around to renting a copy of "Philadelphia". Honestly, I was bored and nothing seemed interesting in the video store at the time. I paid my money, took it home, popped it in, and watched for two hours. The plot is inherently well-known so I won't rehash it here. However, I do find the film to take their viewpoint in treating homosexuals as regular people to almost bashing you over the head extreme. I'm no longer a subscriber to any faith. I'm skeptical of all religions, but I still maintain a study to better understand people and show respect where I can. I respect the fact that one's personal preference in bedroom activites should not be included in workplace policy, or any other public discourse, unless mutually agreed upon. I tend to keep it behind the bedroom door. Whatever two consenting adults do is none of my business. However, if a religion states in it's holy book that the deity who inspired said holy book isn't pleased with same-sex relations, that is their belief and I respect it. Does that mean that religious people should be blindly labeled as "Homophobes"? No, only if they engage in the typical intolerance and prejudice shown to various ethnic groups the world over and apply that to actions consenting adults engage in, in the privacy of their bedroom. I've known and have worked with homosexuals in various jobs and also studied with in course during my college days, and I actually found a few to be more enjoyable and a breath of fresh air compared to some heterosexual people. I don't consider myself to be "Enlightened" (I have no time for people who claim to be anyways), but I eventually came to my current outlook in life long before I saw Philadelphia. I enjoyed the film for it's themes in removing intolerance, but the film just was a tad too preachy at times. Do I recommend it, yes, but I do know some won't change in their views no matter how foolish.
Nice try, but no cigar. (2004-04-26)  'Philadelphia' was Hollywood's first major story on the AIDS issue. It gave a nice try, but still no cigar. What bothered me were the courtroom sequences, which seem ridiculously unrealistic. Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington give stellar performances though.
Sentimental, Tedious and Self-Righteous (2004-03-25)  Tom Hanks is Andrew Beckett, a hotshot young lawyer with a prestigious Philadelphia firm. Denzel Washington is Joe Miller, a rather less respectable young lawyer and something of an ambulance-chaser. But it is to Miller that Beckett desperately turns when he is fired by his employers ostensibly over some small incident involving a mislaid document, really because he has developed AIDs. Trouble is Miller is straight and something of a homophobe. However he does eventually take the case and the film thereafter is largely about his slow shedding of his prejudices about homosexuality and AIDs, prejudices the film's makers doubtless expect a mainstream audience in great measure to share. I watched it because I do love a good courtroom drama. Sad to say, it is a courtroom drama, but not a good one. It has a simple enough message. Homosexuals are people too and people who hate them are silly. And AIDs is a tragic disease whose sufferers deserves compassion and support not fear, exclusion and avoidance. This is of course a good message. And it's about the first time a mainstream big-budget, bit-star Hollywood movie took the topic on. Which is a good thing too. Good though these things are, the film is really pretty terrible, [...]. Because Demme, admirably enough, isn't aiming just to preach to the liberal converted, he doesn't take any risks by being subtle. The result is repellently cloying in its sentimentality and a repellent self-righteousness that ultimately patronizes rather than challenging its audience. A good courtroom drama winds up pretty swiftly after the verdict. Not here: fifteen long minutes remain of Beckett protractedly dying. Determined to lay the thing on with a trowel, Demme even treats us to an interminable closing section of old home video footage of Beckett as a lovely cute little boy. And that sort of appalling aesthetic ham-fistedness sums the movie up. In particular an over-the-top and misguidedly over-extended scene towards the end where a near-death Beckett talks Miller through his favourite aria is surely a contender for one of the most embarrassing to watch scenes in the history of film. I can imagine someone insisting that this clumsy overdoing of everything in sight is justified when the cause is noble enough. I think not. If in any doubt, just look again, say, at Zoltan Korda's heartbreakingly good 1951 film version of 'Cry the Beloved Country' (the one with Poitier in the lead) with all its magnificently intelligent restraint, and compare it with this awful tosh. Or compare the predictable and boring moral journey Miller makes here with the far more interesting moral trajectory of Rod Steiger's character in 'In the Heat of the Night'. Either way, I think, you'll see what I mean.
Look for similar items by category
Related Link
Powered by Amazon Web Services + Amazon Associates.
|
![]](http://resource.hanamoku.com/img/hanamoku_ca/00bar_top_right.gif){kind=small}
![]](http://resource.hanamoku.com/img/hanamoku_ca/00bar_bottom_right.gif){kind=small}
Goods, Product Information
