فيلم Elstree 1976

Elstree 1976

Elstree 1976 is a movie starring Paul Blake, Jeremy Bulloch, and John Chapman. Actors and extras reminisce about their time on the set of Star Wars (1977) and how making the film affected their lives.

Other Titles
エルストリー1976 新たなる希望が生まれた街, Elstree 1976 - Dietro le maschere di Guerre stellari
Running Time
1 hours 37 minutes
Quality
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres
Documentary
Director
Jon Spira
Writer
Jon Spira
Actors
Paul Blake, Anthony Forrest, Jeremy Bulloch, John Chapman
Country
UK
Year
2015
Audio Languages
اللغة_العربية, English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
Subtitles
اللغة_العربية, 日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

Actors and extras reminisce about their time on the set of Star Wars (1977) and how making the film affected their lives.

Comments about documentary «Elstree 1976» (23)

Austin photo
Austin

This is a documentary of the J Edgar case, that was opened for the first time by the New York Daily News in 1984. There is footage of the story from many angles and it follows J Edgar Hoover at his daily life from the papers. There is also a segment of the court case that was opened for the first time, by Judge Collyer and the two policemen involved in the case. At the end of the film, the director, David Apted, interviews all the key players, from members of the civil rights movement, the media and some of the academics who worked on the case, which was brought about by the powerful men of the J Edgar case. There is also interviews with the police officers involved in the case and also some of the lawyers involved. The documentary is great for history buffs, and anyone interested in the history of this case. Overall, I think this is a good documentary for the general public, although it is probably not the best documentary to watch.

Alexander Fernandez photo
Alexander Fernandez

Sometimes it's just the view from the high points of my city. I'm not sure why but the film tells the story of The Walt Disney Company's commitment to dreamers. It's not just the dreams of the big entertainment companies but the dreams of many artists, especially on the small stage. We're seeing the results of this commitment. Whether they succeed or fail, their work often reveals an earnestness about the possibilities of each dream. As one film comes to an end, we see another start. This repeats for many years until a director is chosen to direct his first feature film. During this process, he learns about the creative process from all sides, including his own. The results are a film that reminds us all that we must all try to do our best at everything we do, whether it is on the small stage, in the big studio, or on the big screen. We may have to fight for our dreams. I say this film is a must see because it helps us to think about how important our dreams are and how important we are to make them happen.

Deborah B. photo
Deborah B.

A small documentary on film-making and how the images they create are forged from the personal experiences of the people making them. Although it takes place in 1977, the film's focus is on the later 80's, particularly the eighties. Despite the fact that this was the heyday of "queer films" (such as Nuns on the Run, The Little Girls in the Front Row, etc), the film's greatest strength is its ability to examine the genre's history and current relevance. Though, of course, this is only the surface of it. What are the actual films that feature homosexuality that get made? Is anyone even aware of the existence of a "gay" film? In the end, I was left feeling that there really was no need to film anything on gay issues because these issues are too much of a topic. Maybe this film would have been more useful if it had explored the genre's place in cinema history, but what there is is interesting and valuable. Recommended viewing.

Justin Holmes photo
Justin Holmes

This is an excellent film to bring to a skeptic. It is an excellent case study of the effect of celebrity on a society. It is very clear that Hollywood can't really make an Oscar-winning film anymore, they are driven by star power. The film is very well done. The images are used to great effect and it's very clear that the filmmakers are not biased. The fact that the movie is based on real events makes it all the more intriguing and exciting. It gives you a good feeling that you're watching history.

Gary N. photo
Gary N.

A couple of French people speak at length about how well the world works, how it is predictable and how we're all stupid. This is the point of the film. However, I think they should have been given the chance to explain why this is so and what they think is going on. I think we all know how many things happen in the world that would surprise us and we're not really all that intelligent. I've never been to a garage sale but I've heard the jargon. So we have to take it as we find it. This is not an attack on people who buy things, rent things, have cars and TVs, but the impact of an economy on the people who live here is rather weak. They could have used some examples of things that could be done differently in the UK or other countries that have relatively low costs of living. Some examples: import a lot of stuff from China (and where is China that you don't see on TV?!) and use less and less of the high quality English food you've got. We could even work on the debt that keeps us all going. This film has nothing to say to us.

Lori Johnson photo
Lori Johnson

How can you say you don't like A Clockwork Orange, when you think you love The Godfather, or The Omen, or Empire of the Sun? That's exactly what I feel about this movie. When I first saw the trailer for this movie, I was so excited that I went to go see it right away. Now, seeing the film, I am so disappointed that I can't really recommend this movie. Yes, it has some really cool things about it, but I feel that it doesn't really explain much about anything. It doesn't really have anything to say about the human race, or how people are. It's just like an endless conversation with another person. The biggest thing is that it never really gets you interested. There are some points in the movie that are just funny, but not funny enough. The pacing is not that great either. I feel that there are maybe five or six scenes that move the story forward, and those five or six scenes are usually the most interesting parts of the movie. There are just too many scenes that are boring, and too many that don't really move the story forward. The pacing in this movie is like a teenager's parents. It's like, "oh hey, let's go see this movie, I haven't seen it yet, it's totally new", but you feel like you just wasted an hour and a half of your life. When I went to see the movie, I thought that I was going to see a classic. I saw the trailer and the description of the movie. I didn't know that I was going to see a movie that was supposed to be more about society and what's wrong with it, than about the characters, like A Clockwork Orange. This movie is supposed to be a classic, and that's it. I don't think that there is much to say about the characters. It's like the characters are supposed to be fascinating, but they don't really say anything. I don't think that this movie is about anything. I think that this movie is about boredom. People need to get some real things out of their system, before they go to the cinema, or before they go to watch the movie. Because when people go to see the movie, they need to see something. They need to see a story, or they need to see some emotions. This movie doesn't really say anything. It's just a big, pointless conversation. People should just go see The Godfather, or the Omen, or even Empire of the Sun, instead of this movie. I can't really say anything more about this movie, because it is not something that you really need to know, but if you go see this movie, it is totally out of your control.

Teresa Y. photo
Teresa Y.

It's been a while since I've watched this. But I found it very interesting and it did have its moments. I was more interested in what those scenes would mean for the future of the planet. The one thing I was worried about was whether there was going to be a war between Earth and the future Martians. In fact, this movie does answer that question. It is essentially the same story as the first film, only in the future. One of the things that made me enjoy this movie the most was that there was a lot of visual attention to detail. Every single shot was perfect. The visuals were a bit more primitive than the first film, but there was enough detail to make me feel like I was watching a movie. The camera angle was also different, and that seemed to be a bit of a spoiler. If you've watched the first film, you know that the camera always stayed on the Martian landscape. There was also one scene where the camera never left the Martian landscape. I was actually thinking about what was going to happen next in that scene. But that was the only small detail I noticed in the movie. I do recommend this film to anyone who is interested in science fiction movies. It does a good job of explaining what the future of the world is like.

Angela photo
Angela

Rottie Redding (Graham Greene) is an acclaimed writer. His latest novel is on the New York Times bestseller list. While he was in Paris for his trip, the people of Rottie's town were violently repressed by the French government and he and his wife (Dame Helen Mirren) and son (Jillian Butler) were arrested and held for interrogation. Meanwhile the Anti-terror Squad is following Redding and a few other well-known writers. Dame Helen Mirren is a very good judge of actors. While she made the usual and obvious choice of Graham Greene as the lead character, she also gave him a surprising complexity. While he doesn't fit the mold of the typical German-American writer who writes from behind a desk, he has an ambivalence in his writing. His characters in his novels have moments of bravado and a certain hard edge. In "Rottie Redding" he is both. He is a man who has been used and abused by society and who has just wanted to escape. Dame Helen Mirren is of course right. Graham Greene is a very good director and this film is a great example of the craft. He lets Dame Helen Mirren's nuanced facial expressions shine and feels very comfortable directing her. The best of all is her last scene in which she confronts him on the street and the way she speaks to him, the way she looks at him, the way she moves and she actually has a lot to say. Dame Helen Mirren does very well and it's a testament to the director that she is able to do this without an American accent. This film is an important film in a lot of ways. It is a very good movie and it's worth seeing. But it's also not the best movie ever made.

Raymond Medina photo
Raymond Medina

Truly, this is a great film about life in the UK's "pink and blue" estates. The film is about the residents of Dereham Manor, in the estate of Mossley in East Sussex, and what they go through. It is a depiction of an inner city London area of which a lot of people do not want to admit exists. It is also an in-depth look at the residents of Mossley, some of whom are convicted criminals and others are convicted habitual truant offenders. There are also some celebrities in the film such as the rapper N-Dubz, the televangelist Jim Bakker and the cook Tom Cocaine. It is an interesting and quite powerful film. I will not go into the details of the film. It would ruin it, but I would just like to say that the film does a great job in conveying the drama of what is really going on. Not a great film in itself, but one that you really have to watch to understand.

Nicole M. photo
Nicole M.

I found this doc on a popular indie film website. After some perusal, I found that it was on its way to becoming a huge hit and wanted to see it. It was good and I was shocked to learn that a documentary that was made for the film festival circuit had such a limited release and was never released theatrically. Even worse, the film was never released on video. Luckily for the maker, it was available on VHS, so we could watch it on DVD. As luck would have it, I also happened to own a VHS copy, and I bought it. So I watched this film and after watching it I realized that it was made for the very purpose of generating publicity. It is a very long, very boring and very uninteresting film, which is just the kind of film that would do a lot better as a documentary. However, that was not the film's goal. Its goal was to show us the problems that exist in an unnamed inner-city borough in England. The borough is called Londonderry. The movie does not talk about the city, but rather the people. There is a lot of focus on the criminal elements and the politics of the borough. The director did not want to make a political statement. The movie was made to show people what it is like to live in Londonderry. I would say that the movie was done in the correct manner. It is not a big talky film. It did not try to push a political message. There is no question that the problems that exist in the borough would be very similar to those found in any city in the world. I would have preferred a film about Londonderry than a documentary that tried to make a political statement. I think that the director is the real star of the film. He shows the things that he wants to show, but he also makes the viewer care about what he is showing. This was the best documentary I have seen in my entire life.

Amber Ortiz photo
Amber Ortiz

Clint Eastwood (playing himself) is, as the title of the film implies, a very wealthy man who, after retiring from active duty, has spent his time from years ago working in Switzerland in order to save money for a baby. He is there as part of a project to be made by a company called Laisne. Here, Eastwood narrates and has a dialogue with the scientists who have been working on the project. His work-in-progress was the Laisne android in which the movie takes place. The movie is about two important scientists who are dealing with a technological advance in robotics that they think could be a game changer in the future of medicine. Eastwood and his assistant, a man named Bill Pullman, are the ones who are going to help them to do this. While Eastwood narrates, they go around and talk to the scientists and their assistants. There are some questions that are asked, and then some are answered. This is an interesting movie because of the way it is filmed. It is a kind of documentary, as opposed to a full feature film. The whole film is shot like one continuous film, and the footage is used in a way that keeps the audience involved. It makes you feel like you are with the scientists, and, since the scientists are not talking to each other, they talk to their assistants as well. The movie is well-made, but it has its flaws. The most glaring one is the quality of the action. While the way the action is done is fascinating, it just does not seem to add up. I felt that this was a few notches below some of the great martial arts films that are out there. It is good, but not great.

Olivia O. photo
Olivia O.

I remember watching the documentary (in UK!) when I was a kid and I was completely blown away by it. The story is well-told and shows what it was like to be a child in the town when "Strawberry Fairy" was performing. It's a nice documentary to watch if you've never experienced it or if you're curious about how the town would have looked and how it would have felt. Now, if they would make a sequel I think it would be cool to see how the town has changed over the years and I also hope they put this documentary on TV and on DVD. In fact I think it would be very interesting to see what they had to do and how the town's house, shops, town hall and the historic area looked. As I've said, I'm a huge fan of the movie and so I had to see it again when it came out on DVD. And it was great.

Betty R. photo
Betty R.

It is with great pleasure that I present a documentary on its 25th anniversary. This film is the first one to focus solely on the earlier stages of the film and therefore the programme includes only snippets of the first thirty-six days of filming. To be honest, it is extremely difficult to fully understand what the first few days of shooting were like but what is clear is that the team were looking for a film and it was not long before they realised they had found a goldmine. More than the director's best efforts, the first few days of filming were the most memorable of the entire project. The shooting locations were real and made the documentary feel very authentic. The attention to detail and its ability to tell a story with just the right amount of drama and drama was perhaps the most impressive thing about this first feature film. I would recommend the film to anyone who loves film and wants to get a great insight on what it was like working with the team. It is a must see and definitely worth watching. 7/10

Brittany photo
Brittany

A great documentary about a great rock band, with great music. If you are a fan of the band, you will like this film.

Jean photo
Jean

Dr. Westman was a true pioneer in the field of psychiatry. He was a respected lecturer who was involved with many social and scientific events of the time, and was also the personal physician of King Edward VII. His view on the mind and behavior was rather different than that of the psychiatrist Clifford Geertz, and in my opinion it is still a valuable perspective. It is a valuable perspective not just for medical students and medical researchers, but also for those who are curious to see how mental health conditions are treated in the world today, and perhaps how they might have been treated in the past.

Stephen S. photo
Stephen S.

I had seen a couple of previews for this film before it even came out on DVD. I was excited to see this because I love animals. So the opening is very well done. Then the film picks up. It covers the World War II era and the Nazi dogs who escaped from the death camps. But then the film goes into more detail of the history behind the dogs. They are interesting, and a wonderful representation of the worst of mankind. This is a great film to see, especially for people who love animals.

Andrea photo
Andrea

A powerful documentary about the impact of sexual harassment on those involved, particularly women. One of the highlights is when the film's director, who is female, was forced to keep quiet by her boss when she reported the harassment. It's an intense film, and its message about how sexual harassment is treated by society is heartbreaking. It's also a film that's genuinely insightful, and quite different from your standard "women are wonderful" Hollywood rom-com.

Douglas H. photo
Douglas H.

Saw this on the BBC last night and found it a little difficult to follow, mainly because there were too many images of bears, such as their extermination, that went by too quickly. I found the hunting scenes particularly disjointed and poorly shot. The focus was on the role of the English, a demographic group that is both concerned about this situation and more interested in the history of this area than in the plight of the bears. The interviews were interesting, however, and we found that the British public is more than aware of the bears and their plight. While I found some of the editing difficult, it was much more the fault of the BBC than the filmmakers.

Frances Grant photo
Frances Grant

Let me start by saying that I never thought that the BBC were going to be very good at documentaries. However, I don't think they have ever been quite so bad. This was the most boring documentary I have ever had to sit through. I mean, I found myself laughing at almost everything that the interviewees said. It is as if they were having a party with their friends, and everyone was a little bit off. When I did finish it, I felt that I had been totally robbed of an hour and forty five minutes of my life. I have no idea how this documentary got the nod from the BBC, but if it was just me, I would have rated it a 4 out of 10. If you feel that you are a complete idiot and are like me, then watch it.

Anthony photo
Anthony

This is an interesting movie with a really interesting set of interviews with people connected to the film. It's well written, well-edited, well-edited. It's interesting to see how things play out. I think the overall verdict of the people interviewed on the film is interesting. As is the overall verdict of the film. I do not know if this film is a good representation of the makers' views or not, but I did like it. I think it is worth watching, even if you are not interested in horror movies. It is fascinating to hear about how the filmmakers came to the idea for the film. I think the film is very well-made, with a lot of nice images and a good soundtrack. The interviews are very interesting, and I'm interested in learning about the people who participated. Some of them are very interesting. I think the biggest problem with the film is that it's very long, at over three hours. I found that to be an extremely boring part of the film. I think some of the people interviewed on the film are not very well-connected, and the interviews are too long for them. I'm not a big fan of long documentaries, but I think this is an interesting film, and I recommend it.

Stephen photo
Stephen

Well. it is the End of an Era for Radio and it is a rare treat indeed to see a documentary about a broadcaster as it is without the on-screen rhetoric and loaded with the self-importance and self-confidence of a superstar. And it is a very well made film indeed and shows how Radio really was when it was able to say "no" to big advertisers and they couldn't fill the programme listings with their money. David Frost, producer of 'Black Books', went to get advice from the legendary John Peel and was so much impressed by what he heard, he decided to do a book on Radio he wanted to do 'a lot' about. The result is a film that is sure to please both Radio fans and those who have never heard of Radio. The cast is superb and truly deserve awards for their performance. We're treated to interviews with legendary commentators, Paul F Nolan, Ricky Tomlinson and Robert Hale who all make their voices heard and enlighten listeners to Radio history. We're also shown footage of newscasts and clips from old favourites from The Blues, Spiders, T.V. and all kinds of news. To say this is one of the best documentaries on the subject of Radio is an understatement. But it does deserve a strong recommendation. The commentary is superb. It doesn't touch on current issues such as an American invasion of Iraq. It shows a view from the perspective of a man who used to work for The BBC, the man who could see the many different ways of saying "no" to the advertisers, and the man who became a hero to a young child, who was set free by Radio in the very same way he helped save his family. It's great stuff. On a personal note, I'm a Radio listener and have always been a fan of The Moondance as it is truly unique. I never thought that I would end up listening to a talk show like that in my life. This documentary is fantastic and I cannot wait for the DVD to arrive.

Adam Rice photo
Adam Rice

Following on from his Oscar winning film from the previous year, The Tree of Life, this film in the other hand is not as good. In the same way The Forbidden Room was slightly better than Forbidden, the same can be said of a film this year, The Tree of Life. The Tree of Life, The River of Life, and The Life of Pi are all excellent films, and I certainly wouldn't be looking for an easy way out for the film here, as it is all based on a simple premise. The premise is the story of a tree, and how people are affected by it, and a biologist is sent to find out what will happen to the tree when it dies. The premise is probably the most simple and easily understood of all of these films, and by no means does it have to be realistic. In the same way that the Harry Potter series made it easy to follow, The Tree of Life is easy to follow, and it does a great job of creating a believable world for it's characters. The effects, photography and sound are all amazing, and the director, director of photography, producer, and cinematographer all did a fantastic job. The Tree of Life is worth watching if you're looking for a good look at what a film is made of, and it can also be very entertaining.

Marie Boyd photo
Marie Boyd

This documentary takes a look at the construction of the "strawberry orchard" from the 1950's to the 1990's, as the East coast moves away from its surrounding farmland towards the ocean, creating an increasingly fragmented landscape. One of the key scenes concerns an incident that occurred in 1954 involving a farmer in New Jersey who attempts to save his orchard, which has been cut by eminent domain from an adjacent private property. The director interviews the farmer, who explains that his estate was destroyed by the bulldozers. He is very humble, as his interview reveals that he has just three acres, and his family's livelihood is derived from the orchard. We learn that most of the orchards that were destroyed in the 1950's have been replaced by landscaping, orchards that grow fruit trees. In some cases, they are imported. Another group of farmers, all in their 80's, are interviewed. They explain that they all used to live in the area of their orchards, but now it has become too overgrown and overrun with agricultural activities. They have no choice but to leave. They are devastated by the loss of the orchards that once supported their lifestyle. We hear the many stories of many of these farmers and we learn a lot about them. In the case of the farmer from New Jersey, the director speaks with him, and we learn that he did not want the land to be destroyed. He has to get rid of his properties before the farm gets bought up by a developer. Another farmer, who was displaced from his orchard, tells of the significance of the orchard, as well as how he and his family moved out of the area, into the suburbs. In addition, there are many other farmers interviewed, who all talk about the long-term impacts of the development, and the lack of community life for the farming community. The director does a great job of being both respectful and informative. He takes all of the farmers into account, and it is interesting to see how much the effects have been felt. There are many great views of the land, and the countryside. In addition, we learn about the history of the orchard, and what the land was once like. We see extensive photos of the orchards, and the beautiful hills that surround the area. Overall, this is a great documentary that I would recommend to anyone.