The Movie Book

Rating:
Summary: I think it's wonderful!
Review: I love this book - it is big, beautiful and full of lovely pictures that are from off the beaten track (not typical publicity stills). The price is right for such a substantial book and I wouldn't hesitate to give it to anyone who has even a passing interest in the movie industry. I don't think that the person who wrote the previous lengthy, negative review is familiar with coffee table books and "The Movie Book" is a coffee table book of the best kind. It doesn't need a comprehensive index in order to be wildly entertaining - just open it up and let it wash over you and don't wasteüY

Rating:
Summary: I think it's wonderful!
Review: I love this book - it is big, beautiful and full of lovely pictures that are from off the beaten track (not typical publicity stills). The price is right for such a substantial book and I wouldn't hesitate to give it to anyone who has even a passing interest in the movie industry. I don't think that the person who wrote the previous lengthy, negative review is familiar with coffee table books and "The Movie Book" is a coffee table book of the best kind. It doesn't need a comprehensive index in order to be wildly entertaining - just open it up and let it wash over you and don't wasteüY

Rating:
Summary: Wonderful book!
Review: It's true that this book has many short comings starting with the fact that it is not a movie book per say but a book about the makers of cinema with very little information about them complimented with big, carefully chosen, marvellous pictures. But that's why this book works: because it's not meant to be too intricate, just an introduction to the pioneers of cinema. What makes this book is, of course, the pictures that accompany the little texts at the top. They have a sense of nostalgia about them that just make the book work. My favourite is that of Lauren Bacall standing next to Humphrey Bogart in the set of "To Have And Have Not". It's amazing because even in this still picture, Bogart's coolness, Bacall's class and their chemistry come through so powerful that they are. Apart from the pictures, the book is also good if you want to be introduced to artists you've never heard of. Basically, if you're looking for an elaborate book on cinema, don't buy this. But if you merely want an introduction then this is the book for you. And please: don't forget to check out the Bogart & Bacall picture....

Rating:
Summary: "The Movie Book" that isn't
Review: Unfortunately I bought this book as a present for a friend and naturally, I didn't take it out of its shrink-wrap before I handed it over. Later, when he was reviewing it I had a chance to browse, even if very skimpily. The book should be titled "The American Movie Book". I don't deny the fact that the Americans and their technology dominate the industry, but what about Romy Schneider, Roger Vadim, Carlo Ponti, etc.? I don't want to go into enumerating the missing American names; as I said they dominate the sector. I admit that there ought to be a limit and you have to stop somewhere but couldn't some names be excluded without much loss of quality? Due to understandable reasons, I decline to suggest names but I am sure the creators will agree. As it is, the book is more of 90s.

Exclusions aside, why aren't there any index for, let's say, film names? I could think of many other index ideas that would render a book the quality of being a useful reference material, but then again, maybe the book wasn't intended as a reference material. Why, for example, a chronology of sorts is not thought of, why isn't there a list of Oscar Awards, even if for only the top five categories?

I had noticed the size of the book while ordering, but why such a large size? Wouldn't the size of a predecessor in the series, namely, "The Art Book" suffice, if especially, nothing were to be gained from the sheer size? One would expect to see some films and/or personalities covered through the use of reduced reproductions of the original posters, by looking at the dimensions of the book. Oh, I could just go and on, but let me add one last point to justify my star assignment. I didn't want to assign "-" as that would give the impression that I don't rate the book in terms of stars. I wasn't sure "-" stood for "0 stars", cause, if I were, I would have rather assigned that value and would be giving one more reason; see, I am taking away a star for each major shortcoming I mention in separate paragraphs...

Accordingly, this last paragraph will contain my justification for taking away the last star from the ideal of "5 stars". A work that is to be titled as "The Movie Book" should not be arranged in alphabetical order of the names of the involved personalities. "The Art Book" that I have mentioned above also suffered from the same shortcoming; it only included 500 "top" painters in alphabetical order. If this method is to be followed, the latter should have been titled "The Painters Book", or something of that sort and in our case, we have to title our book as "The Movie-Biz Personalities Book". Admittedly, this is not such a good suggestion, and therefore, we have to keep the title as it is, but then, we have to make the book worthy of this title.