Le rocher

Although i have seen many of Bay's films and enjoyed most of them, nothing is in comparison to this 1996 bay area based action film. I am just curious why it is not as popular or well known as it should. Dont get me wrong, granted it is a familiar film amongst most people yet it never appears in their top ten? Currently this film sits at number 5 on mine. I felt this film carried the most wide range of cinema aspect that any action film can carry. There was a mixture of minor romance, drama, and comedy which is why i am pleased to see that the criterion collection values it. Apparently the AFI probably wont but what do they know, the most action based film they would even consider is Saving Private Ryan which was also a good film but it seemed to be more of a Drama than action even if i reconsider the opening seen. What I think Michael Bay does best it simply put, he makes his stuff cool. He chooses the right angles to show the right section of what every he is filming. You can shoot a navy seal rising from the water in many different ways but his straight on established shot as the seal so rises up and pans his weapon from left to right was amazing. It is the small things like that which eventually amounts to a great film. He doesnt only focus on the big action scenes but the minor ones as well and it work wonderfully because it keeps us all tuned for the duration of the film. It is a film that any action enthusiast would enjoy over and over again. If your considering on purchasing this on DVD, remember to shell out a few more bucks and get the Criterion Collection version, the extra money will be well spent once you see Ed Harris re-doing his takes. I must also give the writers of this film some credit because or it's several directions they went with the script while keeping action the main subject. I mainly focus on action films (although currently in film school i am considering on doing dramas) and from all the ones i had ever seen i think this film is surely the best overall, not my number 1 favorite but the overall best pick for anyone to see and i truely believe that is someone doesnt enjoy this film regardless of age, gender, etc. you have problems and something is wrong with you. And for all the people who have seen this film, i would like to ask ou to reconsider this film's greatness for what it deserves. ENJOY THE ROCK!

Fantastically made. Undoubtedly one of the best action films in the last 20 years, Bruckheimer had a fantastic effect on this as his oh so loud impact fashioned this movie into what it is, quite possibly one of the finest in its' genre. Connery puts in a sturdy performance as does Cage but the show is stolen by the one and only Edd harris. His commanding performance carried the movie through small snippets where boredom may have set in, his emotion in the delivery of his lines left nothing to be desired and the role seemed so fitting for such a man, although his height was comic in comparison with the other marines.

All round great film with good acting with just the right amount of comic relief when it was most required. thumbs up fellas

The Rock is one of my all-time favorite suspense - thrillers. Believability - almost always a problem for this sort of film - is enhanced by a very compelling script, sets, and powerful performances by masters Sean Connery and Ed Harris. Like a good work of fiction, it's the quality of the telling that makes it believable, not the likelihood that it might happen. There are no problems with the way this story is told. The acting, editing, directing and visuals do not slip at all. Nick Cage - in a performance which approaches his best work - adds a bit of campiness and humor to this explosive mixture, and John Spencer, Tony Todd, David Morse, and Michael Biehn all contribute substantially to an exciting, fast-paced and emotionally draining film. Any avid movie-goer will be hard pressed to find a single actor in this sizable cast who has not either become a major star or a fine character actor over the last nine years.

The plot takes a number of twists and turns along the road, so to discuss almost any aspect of it in detail would require at least mild spoilers. None of the plot twists are unbelievable if you are willing to accept the basic premise. The story begins with Ed Harris - a Viet Nam war hero and field leader who is now a general and has become fed up with the abandonment of covert forces operatives by the US government. To get what he wants, he recruits some of the best officers under his command to take control of and hold Alcatraz Island, holding 70-some-odd civilians hostage and aiming four missiles loaded with deadly Sarin gas directly at the heart of San Francisco.

Biehn heads an elite Navy SEAL team assigned to infiltrate and disable Harris' capabilities. Cage joins him as the FBI biochemical specialist assigned the task of disarming the warheads, and the only man who can get them in to do their respective jobs is an aging British intelligence agent who has been incarcerated for 30 years or so by the government that now needs his help. Connery's John Mason escaped from Alcatraz during his incarceration, and for all intents and purpose - is a much rougher, more real James Bond character without the gadgets and the comic-book super-villains. All of the above is established in the first ten minutes of the film and the next two hours is a wild ride, with some very tense moments and some very intense performances.

I'm sure a lot of people will pick this film apart for the occasional unbelievable scene, etc, but it's worth while to remember - as my spouse is always telling me - "its only a movie".

If you want reality, take a walk outside or go to work!

There are no discernible powerful political messages in this film. While it must be acknowledged that the USA does sometimes treat members of its armed forces in an unappreciative and cavalier manner, this film does not really drive this point home in the way that, for example, Saving Private Ryan did. While it is also true that the US government does occasionally cover-up its own illegal activities, or soft-pedal them with propagandistic white lies, these issues are not really the subject of this film. This is made abundantly clear by the oddly out-of-place references to Roswell, New Mexico. The writers either did not want to dignify any perceived political messages by bringing up real-world transgressions and cover-ups - many of which are far more sinister than the secret development of stealth planes. This film is pure entertainment and - at that - a work of art. Treat it as such and you might just have a good time with it.

THE ROCK / (1996) ***1/2

Starring: Sean Connery, Nicolas Cage, Ed Harris, Jon Spencer, David Morse, William Forsythe, Bokeem Woodbine, and Vanessa Marcil. Directed by Michael Bay. Running time: 135 minutes. Rated R (for strong intense violence, language and brief sexuality)

Notes taken while screening The Rock:

· The film contains superior character development of both the antagonist and protagonist. Each is clear and well defined. We also learn the characters motives, reasoning, dramatic situation, and premise--all brilliantly introduced within the setup.

· Sean Connery provides us with strong character development through John Patrick Mason--although the character is somewhat a rip off of the Anthony Hokins' Hannibal from "The Silence of the Lambs."

· It is uncanny how well the movie's visual style works. It propels the film's suspense the extra mile, increasing the tension and enticement. Also contributing to the style is the fitting soundtrack.

· Some of the events are excessively coincidental. For example, during an exciting chase scene, Mason dashes out of a building, escaping the clutches of concealing police, discovering a Hum-V seemingly awaiting his arrival. Experienced chemist, Stanley Goodspeed (Nicolas Cage), chases after him, in a high speed Ferrari sitting outside his position in a building. Another coincidence occurs in the high security prison, where Mason escapes a grenade blast by dashing at random into a room, where, of course, there just so happens to be a secure bathtub to climb in.

· There is a stolid, aggressively effective cast present. Each actor contributes a taut, penetrating performance, especially Ed Harris as the film's villain, General Francis X. Hummel who demands a moral purpose holding the lives of an urban area at stake.

* The character's motives and perfectly defined, especially General Francis X. Hummel. Even as the film's bad guy, he serves an understandable position, thus we empathize with him, unlike most villains witnessed in modern day thrillers.

· The standard three act structure is flawless: each scene propels the plot forward. The sequences either create a new problem or complicate a previous conflict, favoring with the later concept. This raises the line of tension even further.

· Most of the production takes place in a high security prison, Alcatraz, crafted with a complex, awe-inspiring atmosphere towering over that of most action movies.

· Sean Connery handles the complicated role of John Mason with mere simplicity, yet easily torments the audience with a sense of omniscient knowledge of the plot.

· The picture is unpredictable and contains several inducing and unexpected twists proving this movie is imaginative and free to surprise us. The conclusion is not fomulatic. "The Rock" is filled with artful design and crafty performances. It is one of the year's best action films.

Brought to you by Hollywood Pictures.

"The Rock" combined action, adventure, comedy, romance, special effects and a great plot into one of the biggest worldwide blockbuster action films in decades. Add to the mix, Sean Connery, Nicolas Cage, Ed Harris and a great supporting cast including John Spencer, William Forsythe and David Morse, and "The Rock" is one of the best ways to spend two hours. This film also devotes a great deal of time and effort to character development, something that most action movies neglect. This film is definitely underrated and is worth more praise than it has received.