Leonard Maltin's Movie and Video Guide 2004 Paperback – September 30, 2003

In purchasing this Movie Guide I was simply looking for a reference book for films. To me the reviewsare secondary and I only use them as a guide. I like the book so there is a nice quick synopsis of afilm at my fingertips. This book does this very well.I especially like the 'Index of Stars' in the back. Sometimes I cannot remember the name of the film,or a film is on the TV and there is no reference to its title. I look up the lead actor and try to find itamong the film's listed for that actor. It has come in handy once in a while when the film's name isjust not working it's way out of the brain.I purchased the bigger version of the Movie Guide, not the 'Mass Market' version, which is slightlysmaller. The dimensions are: 5 inches wide by 7-15/16 inches high and 2-1/2 inches thick. The MassMarket version is: 4.3 inches wide by 7 inches high and 2.4 inches thick. Amazingly the weightdifference posted on this site shows the bigger version as 2.6 pounds and the 'Mass Market' versionas 1.6 pounds.In buying the bigger version I was hoping for a more solidly constructed book. The smaller ones tendto fall apart after a few years. So far the bigger one has lasted me 3 years and still in one piece.I was also hoping that the print would be bigger. I have no reference for this one so, no comment,on the type size. Although I have no trouble reading the small type even at my old age. Both sizescontain the same number of reviews so I am not sure what the differences are between the two sizes.Print size? Extra bonus features? Maybe someone else can comment on this aspect.Overall I would give this Movie Guide 5 Stars just for being available year after year and lasting over3 years. I usually buy a new one every 3 years or so and keep the old one. If you read the intro you willfind he has to delete some films to make way for newer and more relevant films. Makes sense to me, soan updated version every few years is needed if you want to keep up with the ever changing landscapeof cinema.

I purchased this book so I could check up on movie descriptions from various satellite TV channels and get more info on some that are very briefly and inadequately described in the online guide. While the book is fairly big, the type is very small - requires good light and good eyes and still probably reading glasses! Aside from that, this book is a disappointment in several ways.Largely redundant with Classic Guide - Lack of coverage of MANY 2008 movies - Lack of coverage of non-major movies.Maltin has a Classic Movie Guide - I think it runs through 1960. It is pretty good and the type size is easily readable. The 2009 Guide covers many of the same classic movies, si it is redundant in amny ways - I guess to bulk up the number of entries to 17,000.This book doesn't cover even many of the bigger name 2008 movies that are now on HBO, Showtime, etc. (as I write this it is January, 2009). So, even though it's the 2009 Guide, it doesn't cover all of 2008.This book doesn't cover many, many of the movies on the various channels. If the movie is somewhat obscure or, apparently, not from a major studio, you probably won't find it here. I guess I expected to and therefor was disappointed.All of Maltin's reviews need to be broken up into 3 distince volumes, in my opinion. Make the Classic guide (pre-1960 a trifle more complete and let it go at that. Break the other guides up into a 1960 - 1990 book that is comprehensive and then a third one ruinning from 1990 - Present (whatever year that may be) and, again, more comprehensive than this one is.Better yet, someone could do a set of 3 books from the AllMovie.com website. Their reviews are every bit as good, though they don't have STAR Ratings, AND they are far more comprehensive - it is extremely rare to not find a movie title there - in all of its versions through the years.The reviews this book has are good and it is extensive. But, if you're planning to use it to get more info on the movies on your satellite channels, you may be disappointed, too.

As a long-time user of Maltin's guide, I think it's most useful after you gain some familiarity with his tastes and preferences. For example, after years of reading his reviews, I know he likes musicals much better than I do, and comedies not as much. If he gives a movie two or two-and-a-half stars, I know it's going to be a pretty entertaining movie, probably, as he often complains, one that follows a formula, but the formula works, and these movies work. If he gives a movie three stars, that tells me the movie tries for something a little more ambitious -- but his opinion of whether it succeeds or not doesn't always agree with mine, so, for me, his three-star movies are less dependably entertaining than his two or two-and-a-half star ones. Three-and-a-half star movies are usually so good almost anyone would enjoy them, and four star movies are the undisputed classics. This leaves one-and-a-half star movies (usually boring, unless they're comedies, which I always add an extra star to for the ones Maltin seems to take off), and the BOMBs, some of which are fascinatingly bad. For example, he rated "Francesco" a BOMB, and although it was a little weird to watch Mickey Rourke playing St. Francis, neither my husband or I could take our eyes off it. My biggest complaint is that I wish the index of stars and directors were more extensive, but the book is so huge as it is that it's kind of hard to handle, so maybe that would best be presented in a second volume. I wish the foreign films were in another volume, too, so more could be included. Still, overall, quite an achievement, and I use it a lot.