|Page 1 of 2:|| |
|Index||13 reviews in total|
Obviously this movie is made by someone with a great love for the
Italian community, or rather what was the Italian community during the
years of emigration in early 20th century, who are now integrated
citizens and part of the USA. Just like the Irish, who came before. And
everybody else, who followed.
The USA is founded on emigration. On people coming to USA to seek their fortune and thus providing the labour, on which the modern age was build. That's a lot of eyes, but unfortunately the stories told from those days are mostly the same, and in the same historic perspective.
This movie narrows the focus to depict a fragment of the battle to define exactly what democracy is - and who gets to define it. Labour unions are at the forefront of this battle, recognising the oppression that makes a few people very rich and powerful enough to bend the government. For example the banker J.D. Rockefeller, who was able to call in national guards to terrorize and kill his striking miners, who were kept under slave-like conditions.
One can never see the whole of a story, without losing important details. But "No God, no master" manages very well, I believe, to show how both the powerful and the powerless are only just people, and how bridges of understanding can be build through simple acts of diligence and kindness.
Besides being presented with a less knows aspect of the story of how the nation was build, I loved the feeling of being "back then". Indie movies can't recreate and build fake streets, but rather than resorting to CGI like many Indie movies (and over-funded movies too - neither with quite satisfactory results) No God, No master makes do with camera angles, select streets and plain good storytelling in frames to create the illusion of streets from a 100 years ago.
My only critique was a tendency to take "tension music" right to the edge. I would say this was unnecessary as the plot was sufficient to keep me interested and leaning forward.
All in all a decent movie I have no problems recommending. 7/10 for just making a good movie.
"Without blood shed there is no progress. Anarchy now, anarchy forever." During the summer of 1919 a series of bombs begin to show up in New York. The targets are prominent politicians and businessmen and the man investigating is William Flynn (Strathairn), an agent with the U.S. Bureau of Investigation. What he uncovers is an anarchy group bent on destroying the government. Wvweything is going great and he is on the trail of the ones in charge, then the F.B.I. shows up to help. I wasn't really sure what to expect from this going in, in fact I knew so little about it that I didn't even know it was based on a true story. When I found that out I became more interested and 5 minutes in to the movie I was sucked in. This movie captivated me and had me yelling at the TV in some spots. It's very interesting to see how events that happened 100 years ago are almost identical to what is happening today, have we learned nothing? The movie will suck you in and anger you all at once. That is the sign of a great movie. I don't want to say too much about it but if you thought J.Edgar Hoover was bad once he got power wait till you see him before. Overall, one of the best movies I have seen in a long time. If you liked the Untouchables you will love this. I easily give this an A.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
OK, I love period pieces and tried to like this one despite the obvious
budget constraints of No God, No Master as it moved along, but the no-
nuanced presentation of the historical characters made it a task. The
simplistic and fiery speech of Galleani (face lit from underneath to
emphasize "evil") was a prime example. Flynn in the middle of a melee
of activists and cops as his boss (who instigated the fight) looks on
passively, is another. Say what you will about baddie Palmer, he seemed
to have an awful lot of patience with the uncooperative Flynn.
Just taking it as a movie - a "work of art" as opposed to reportage - it failed to satisfy. The all too many plot lines were hard to follow and hard to buy into. The "romance," in particular, was just too cute and convenient and made some of the final scenes pretty screwy. But maybe my attention drifted and I missed some details. Would that I could convince a smart friend to watch this movie and answer my questions, because I am befuddled and left to wonder...
Why was the boy taken?
What are we supposed to conclude when Flynn finds Louise Berger living in a nice apartment, rather than a tenement hovel?
Is Flynn partially blind? If not, how come such a brilliant couldn't see the car following him during his ride in the country?
How did agent Swanson beat him to the hideout? Who the !#!!^>< is agent Swanson?
Why was the boy in the barn? Are the anarchist bad guys also pedophiles?
If Flynn is such a liberal and is so disgusted by Palmer's actions, why doesn't he want to talk to the press when the boss first makes the offer?
Why in blazes was the boy in the barn?
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
No God, No Master (2013) is thoroughly ridiculous in its attempts to
unify some type of coherent story by putting together a conglomeration
of notorious events and characters (Industrial Workers of the World,
John D. Rockefeller, Sacco and Vanzetti, The Palmer Raids (1919 and
1920), Emma Goldman, and J. Edgar Hoover, into a debilitated storyline.
The acting is horrendously weak, the script, loose and dead, and I even noticed many mistakes (camera light in automobile windshield reflection, reflection of a modern skyscraper apartment in a shop window, the "yellow lines" of a modern road that were heaped with dirt but still visible).
At its most simplistic, No God, No Master is merely a torrid attempt at anarchist propaganda. Most of the scenes are contrived and stilted, and the budget hampers the effective power.
It is average. Reds (1981), The Molly Maguires (1970), Germinal (1993) and Matewan (1987) (which also had David Strathairn) are far superior films.
This is not an action pack movie. It is somewhat of a documentary of a part of history. History is not pretty and laced with the making of a star studded movie. I haven't really seen much about the Italian heritage. It is interesting to see what the early immigrants had to go through. There were spots in the movie that were a bit slow and could have had improvement. But I am sure the movie was made to explain history. I live in Milwaukee where much of the film was made. It was fun watching it from a distant. I remember that summer. The actors were lucky we had such nice weather. Around here the seasons are pretty erratic. I talked to one of the stagehands and it was interesting. Glad I finally got a chance to see it. I have been looking for it ever since I viewed it being made. David Stratharin is a great actor. I feel he hasn't gotten the praise that he should get. I have seen him in many movies. Again he did a great job in this movie making it believable. I really like Sam Witwer and think he will be a good actor. Love him in "Human Beings."
So Many Historical Headlines to Cover, So Little Time, and So Little
Money to Make the Movie. It's Ambition and Heart are Never Realized,
Except in a Cliff Notes Kind of Way. The Story Here of Palmer's Raids,
the Attorney General's Attempt in 1919 to Mass Deport Thousands of
Immigrants before Such a Thing was Made Illegal, is a Story that is
just too Enormous to Tell in Ninety Minutes.
Add to that the Backstory of Fat Cat Indifference and Down Right Worker Oppression is Given Some Screen Time but Again is Light on Detail and Heavy of Speechifying. But if this Little Movie can do Anything it Can Draw Attention to a Somewhat Forgotten Time and Place in America's Early Twentieth Century History and Might Propel Folks to do Some Research.
The Subject Matter and the Situation has Not Lost Any of its Relevance and Can be Seen as a Mirror to Things that Matter just as Much Today. It is an Engrossing Story and is Played Well Enough to Entertain as well as Enlighten.
This was a Time when Workers were Definitely Exploited and Sought Collective Bargaining. It Must Also be Said that the Workers were Being Exploited from All Sides and there was Blood on Everybody's Hands.
Worth a Watch for its Historical Relevance and as a Primer for More Investigation into the Struggles of the Times and a Sordid Situation that can Never be Forgotten, Lest We Repeat. Oh, Wait, We Have. So that Makes this Movie Even More Important.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This is a nice period piece that was a married by the distortion of facts about Galliani and his anarchy thugs and their roll in bombings and robberies in 1919-1920. Let's establish a few facts not touched on or distorted in the film- The first batch of bombs in April 1919, numbered 36 bombs, they were intended to be delivered on May Day (Communist Workers holiday). Half were not delivered to insufficient postage. Only one other detonated when a Georgia Senator's housekeeper opened the package, she's was horribly injured. No boy on a bike was blown up as the movie shows. On June 2 1919, eight 25lb dynamite and shrapnel bombs were blown up simultaneously. Addressees included government officials who had endorsed anti-sedition laws and deportation of immigrants suspected of crimes or associated with illegal movements, as well as judges who had sentenced anarchists to prison. These bombs only succeed in killing a night watchman. The film doesn't mention the 1910 bombing of the LA Times, which is actually the first terror bombing in the US, not the 1920 bombing of Wall Street, another deliberate lie in the film. The way they try to show that they were struggling workers all innocent of attempting to kill officials and some corporate board members is just sad. The attempt at making the two robbers look heroic giving their speeches at their sentencing is pitiful attempt at communist spin. Modern socio-communist filmmakers ruined what could have been a great factual historic drama. Too bad.
Well, were to start and what to say, eh? Although only a "user" of IMDb
for a measly 2 years I have noticed that many remark on the high marks
of certain movies, i.e. No God, No Master and Time Lapse. Furthermore,
for my part, I have also seen quite a few movies with odd marks, both
overrated and underrated.
Sure, movie companies may very well pay persons to write favorable reviews. Some, however, may seem to write bad reviews just for spite towards those over-favorable reviews. Neither type of review is any good.
Movie companies I understand, it is, after all, all about the money. But, for crying out loud, write a fair review if you take the time to write one.
Plot: set in the 1920s, an honest officer investigates bombings seemingly connected to the political atmosphere during that period.
5,9 (8th June 2015) seem high. However, it is not as bad as 1/10, neither as good as 9/10. An average 5/10 is more fitting.
Period movies are always interesting, no less so for a historian like me, and always a break from futuristic and contemporary movies.
Now, this movie has way too many subplots and characters for its own good. what is worse, none of them has depth, the makers fails to make the viewer root for the hero or feel disgust for the villain. Mainly because there is no real hero or villain. To me this movie feels like a dramatized documentary like Captain Cook: Obsession and Discovery (2007).
Hardened actors like Strathairn and Wise try their best, but seem constrained by budget, less good actors and poor writing.
The action scenes are very poor at best, especially the man to man fighting scenes.
Anti- or pro-Russia propaganda? In my view you may consider both. however, I choose to go for the middle way and root for justice by honest methods.
I may seem to crash down on this movie totally, so why 5 out of 10? Well, regardless of genre, I have seen much much worse than this. And it is not all that bad. The setting is believable, i.e. costumes, location- and studio shots. The main plot IS interesting although not fully explored nor masterfully executed.
I give it 5 out of 10 because it is a decent attempt to make period movie. it is not the first choice for a Friday night, but it will pass the time, truly a made-for-TV kind of film
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Started out look'n pretty good, then went from bad to worse. All the same old liberal narrative about the rich bad guys and the poor good guys, in this case immigrants (sound familiar?). Any kind of movie that attempt to persuade politically, to be any good, has to do it with some measure of finesse, you know, so you don't even know your being persuaded. One gets the feeling right away that there is very little depth to the movie as we watch our main protagonist start out with a resolve to track down the bad guys only to learn (according to this narrative) they aren't the bad guys at all. (Example: When a rich guy makes reference to his front lawn 'our guy' replies 'I wouldn't know, I have never had a front lawn. (Message? America is a really bad unfair place.) This movie is soooo heavy handed. Example: To show how our main 'poor guy' couldn't be guilty, they take the time to show that he like children and kitties... well, I imagine Hitler and Stalin did too.
The idea is nice, Crime fighter investigates the "bad guys". Here is the twist, Anarchists, Marxists are not enemies, but friends who are misunderstood by capatalist racsists who want "their country". The idea that the early 20th century anarchist movement is something to be revered because it was in the forefront of "sexual liberation, women's rights, labor, etc." is nothing short of propaganda. Emma Goldman, Sacco & Vanzetti are the victims? Are we all to believe that these two terrorists were just constantly just talking about the global revolution of the proleteriot against the bourgoise and nothing more? Emma Goldman? Are we seriously putting trash out like this? I will never get this time back in my life, and I strongly urge you to not only never see this, but warn your friends. Disgusting attempt at the re-write of history.
|Page 1 of 2:|| |
|External reviews||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|