Reviews written by registered user
|58 reviews in total|
There is a lot of truth in Michael Moore's film. During its first eight
months, the Bush administration did ignore the threat of terrorism. They
have been protective of Saudis involved with extremists. And the war in
Iraq not only had little to do with terrorism, but it actually interfered
with the war on terrorism by diverting resources.
However, Moore does so much grandstanding going for the cheap laugh that he damages his own credibility. Moore seems to put entertainment before informing, which is why `Fahrenheit 9/11' is something less than a good film. While it may cause many to justly question the Bush administration's policies, this movie will also mislead many viewers into thinking this is what a well made documentary looks like -- and `Fahrenheit 9/11' is nothing like a well made documentary.
Writer-director Jean-Jacques Annaud has given us a beautifully photographed
story about two tiger cubs who become separated from each other when their
world is violated by man.
Many have dismissed `Two Brothers' as a kiddie film. First of all, this movie is a bit too complicated for younger children. Second, anyone who dismisses this movie sight unseen will be doing themselves a great disservice.
The main story is told primarily from the point of view of the tigers. There are some human subplots, and the human actors do offer their voices, but the story is told primarily through visuals with no dialog or narration. Annaud's skill as a director is such that he does not need the dialog to tell the story. You know at all times what the tigers are thinking and why they react the way the do. Annaud actually brings you into their mind. This is a very expertly made movie that should not be missed.
Nhat Minh Dang gives us a look at the complex society that is modern
Vietnam. We see a Buddhist society with a Communist government that is
beginning to embrace western values -- at least commercial values. All
these competing factors have their positive and negative sides, which the
writer/director presents with openness and honesty, and through the eyes of
a mentally underdeveloped young man working as an artist model. The story
centers around his boyhood home and the quava tree which grew outside. The
house and the tree both symbolize the history of Vietnam in the 20th
For most of us, this is a glimpse of a world most of us do not know -- not to mention a well made film.
In 2002, a suicide bombing in Maggido took the lives of seventeen innocent
people. Only sixteen of the dead were identified. A team of Israeli
filmmakers became obsessed with discovering the identity of victim number
What follows is a good detective story, but even more than that `No. 17' gives us a view of the Mideast conflict that western news organizations tend to ignore. While news stories often profile the terrorists and the bombers, the victims remain nameless and faceless. `No. 17' is a much needed film that provides the victims of terrorist bombings the only voice they will most likely be granted.
This is debatable, but The Pianist may be the best work Roman Polanski has
ever done -- although this may be one of his most un-Polanski-like films.
Unlike Chinatown, Rosemary's Baby and The Ninth Gate, here evil eventually
has to give way in the face of good.
The film is also timely. There has been in recent years an upswing in anti-Semitism. Jewish studients in US and Canadian colleges report verbal and physical abuse by faculty and other students. European nations ignore the rise of anti-Jewish violence in their own countries. Arab press and websites praise Hitler, deny the Holocaust and call for a war of genocide against Jews. (How can one both praise Hitler and deny the Holocaust is beyond me, but I have read the articles!)
The Pianist is based on Wladyslaw Szpilman's autobiography. But in watching this film,I do wonder if Polanski took any artistic license and added any autobiographical material of his own. Szpilman's and Polanski's wartime experiences are similar. This may well be the most personal film Polanski has ever made.
There were scenes that brought me to the edge of my seat with excitement.
There were scenes that went absolutely nowhere and made me want to yell,
"Come on! Get on with it!"
There are some great performances. Then there's Ian McKellen talking as if his fake beard got caught in his mouth.
For everything good one can say about "Lord of the Rings," there is something negative one can say. This isn't a bad movie, but it is not memorable. For all the fuss, I predict it will go the way of all recent big Oscar nominated films and be quickly forgotten. This is an average movie at best.
Sean O'Casey's play does not translate to the screen very well. A bit
talky, it may have worked fine on stage, but it is not movie material.
Still Hitchcock has moments where he shows his genius as a filmmaker.
are camera shots and editing cuts that tell more of the story than any of
Still, I would not recommend this film for anyone who is new to the work of Alfred Hitchcock. Save this one for the advance class, and let the beginners view "The Secret Agent," "Shadow of a Doubt," "Vertigo," and "Psycho," just to name a few.
There have been many documentaries of the Holocaust, giving various
viewpoints. Seldom do we see the Holocaust through the eyes of the
Two Israeli rock musicians, Yehuda Poliker and Ya'akov Gilad, sons of survivors, capture their parents' story through their music. The film does wander from this main theme at times, but it remains a powerful and emotional testimony to the best of humanity.
Who says film noir is dead? The Coen Brothers prove otherwise.
True recent so-called "film noirs" have been poor imitations of the real thing. (The German made "Wege in die Nacht," or "Paths in the Night" is a notable exception.) But obviously, there are some film makers who know noir!
"The Man Who Wasn't There" has many of the best film noir elements. The main character is an average man -- an everyman. He's not a bad sort, but for once he gives into temptation with deadly results. The camera work is superb, using black and white shadowy cinematography. The Coens throw in just a touch of quirkiness, not too much, to give it the Coenesque edge.
I know what I saw. I know what happened and how. It is just after having my mind screwed with for two hours, I don't believe anything that I saw! MEMENTO is a wild ride that leads you down many paths -- most of which are dead ends. Even when the truth is revealed you won't believe it! I have to keep my comments very brief for fear that I may spoil this film for others. There are a few, brief slow parts, but use those to catch your breath -- the ride will start up again in a few seconds.
|Page 1 of 6:||     |