It has been years since I saw a narrative film deal as honestly on the subject of war as this excellent work. I'm sure Angelina will take some flak for this film, but no good deed goes unpunished, as they say. And this is a truly brave film, and I think an honest and affecting film, that I hope everyone will have the opportunity to see. This film is not about the condemnation of one or another group of people, this film is about the human poverty that war and ethnic hatred visits on all who come in come in contact with it. This film is also about what might have been, and what still may be - a peace among people, and a love for our brothers and sisters. Thank you, to all those good people who joined together to make this film.
Reviews
5 Reviews
25th Hour
(2002)
better than most Hollywood but still not very good
27 October 2006
Look -- I sympathize with the people who like this film. I really wanted to like it -- I mean, great director, great cast ... what could go wrong? But the fact is, this is just not a very good movie. It tries. It's heart is in the right place. But it just limps along, with this cheesy sentimental music playing the entire time like some kind of remix of Once Upon a Time in America. This is a film with almost no momentum at all. It has some good set pieces that work okay on their own, but as a whole the movie doesn't really gel. It's all over the place. It's a mess. There are at least 10 scenes in the film that don't really wind up adding anything to the story even though they're interesting to watch by themselves. And there are some downright awkward scripting moments where the actors seem a bit self-conscious at how seriously the film is trying to take itself. I wouldn't feel right rating it much higher because ... frankly, Spike can do much better, and has before, and will again. This is a misfire of a movie. The only reason it can be forgiven is that at least it was a misfire made by a filmmaker trying new things, and not by a bunch of studio execs.
Scoop
(2006)
better than I expected
28 July 2006
I went to the movie theater this afternoon expecting to be underwhelmed by Scoop. Happily, the film exceeded expectations, at least a little bit. It's nothing heavy, nothing deep -- and not anywhere as good as any number of real Allen masterpieces -- but it's also completely enjoyable as a light, bantering comedy. There's something kind of simple and sweet about it. "Cute" was the word I heard from people in the audience as they were walking out after the show. It doesn't feel like Allen set out to create a masterpiece here, it feels like he wanted to make a little comedy and have fun doing it. Compared to just about everything Hollywood is producing, Allen's stuff has a tendency to charm. Even the fluffy stuff. These days it's just refreshing to go to a movie made by an actual human being.
Freedomland
(2006)
a made-for-TV movie with decent actors
18 February 2006
I felt extremely tired watching this clumsy, poorly-executed movie. Until I checked, I thought it must have been made by a first-time director. From the very first scenes it felt so forced, so artificial ...
The actors do what they can to save a self-conscious, witless script. Ultimately, they fail. There are some monologue scenes in the first half where the camera moves and editing are so frenetic and the direction so nonsensical that I was thrown completely out of the story. The story, which is only barely there to begin with. Editor Nick Moore was doing okay back in the days when he was assisting great editors like Michael Kahn, but here he's drawing way too much attention to himself without helping the film. It's not actually his fault, to be fair. Nothing could salvage this picture.
There are no twists. What we suspect in the first 5 minutes turns out to be exactly right in the end. Meanwhile, there's a lot of struggling around with heavy, obvious plot devices. There are scenes -- including the scene from which the film gets its name -- that go absolutely nowhere and turn out not to have anything to do with anything. There are some turgid nods toward race-relations issues ...
But is there a film here? Sadly, no -- not really a film, more like an overly-long TV cop drama that I might watch if I had a bad case of insomnia. Nothing falls together, nothing really works.
This is a film almost totally lacking in subtlety of purpose. We don't believe a single thing that happens on the screen. It is, in short, an awkward B-picture with a budget large enough to hire actors with talent. Talent that is sadly wasted here by poor direction and over-the-top, uneven writing by Richard Price, who seems to specialize in barely-watchable pulp crime melodramas, of which this is definitely one.
The IMDb trivia listings for the director, Joe Roth, say he is "Ranked #6 in Premiere's 2003 annual Hollywood Power List." If that's true, it might help explain why audiences have to sit through so much tiresome, contrived Hollywood product. Please, Mr. Roth, give us a break.
The actors do what they can to save a self-conscious, witless script. Ultimately, they fail. There are some monologue scenes in the first half where the camera moves and editing are so frenetic and the direction so nonsensical that I was thrown completely out of the story. The story, which is only barely there to begin with. Editor Nick Moore was doing okay back in the days when he was assisting great editors like Michael Kahn, but here he's drawing way too much attention to himself without helping the film. It's not actually his fault, to be fair. Nothing could salvage this picture.
There are no twists. What we suspect in the first 5 minutes turns out to be exactly right in the end. Meanwhile, there's a lot of struggling around with heavy, obvious plot devices. There are scenes -- including the scene from which the film gets its name -- that go absolutely nowhere and turn out not to have anything to do with anything. There are some turgid nods toward race-relations issues ...
But is there a film here? Sadly, no -- not really a film, more like an overly-long TV cop drama that I might watch if I had a bad case of insomnia. Nothing falls together, nothing really works.
This is a film almost totally lacking in subtlety of purpose. We don't believe a single thing that happens on the screen. It is, in short, an awkward B-picture with a budget large enough to hire actors with talent. Talent that is sadly wasted here by poor direction and over-the-top, uneven writing by Richard Price, who seems to specialize in barely-watchable pulp crime melodramas, of which this is definitely one.
The IMDb trivia listings for the director, Joe Roth, say he is "Ranked #6 in Premiere's 2003 annual Hollywood Power List." If that's true, it might help explain why audiences have to sit through so much tiresome, contrived Hollywood product. Please, Mr. Roth, give us a break.
Shrapnels in Peace
(2001)
a strong film with stunning images
26 February 2005
I saw this film in lovely 35mm at the Arab and Iranian Film Festival in Seattle in 2002. Unfortunately, most people won't be able to catch it on film, and probably not even on video.
The story revolves around a loose-knit group of Iranians who collect and sell scrap metal near the Iran-Iraq border in the years following the war. Central among these is an Iranian boy of about 15 whose story forms the core of the film.
Needless to say, the scrap metal they are collecting is all military scrap left over from the war with Iraq -- guns, tanks, bullets, artillery shells, land-mines. It's a dangerous line of work. A platonic flirtation develops between the boy and a local girl -- somehow all the more poignant because nothing ever happens between them -- as he takes greater and greater risks to collect and dismantle land-mines to earn a living. There is also a friendship between the main character and his younger friend, who is of African descent. They live together on an abandoned ship in the middle of a river, and there is an obvious allusion to Huckleberry Finn at work.
The images in this film are stark and stunning, and the anti-war message subtle enough that it doesn't get in the way of the visual storytelling. On the whole, I thought this was a beautiful, humanist film, one that deserves to be seen far more than almost any film coming out of Hollywood now. It's a shame that it was never really distributed in the west.
The story revolves around a loose-knit group of Iranians who collect and sell scrap metal near the Iran-Iraq border in the years following the war. Central among these is an Iranian boy of about 15 whose story forms the core of the film.
Needless to say, the scrap metal they are collecting is all military scrap left over from the war with Iraq -- guns, tanks, bullets, artillery shells, land-mines. It's a dangerous line of work. A platonic flirtation develops between the boy and a local girl -- somehow all the more poignant because nothing ever happens between them -- as he takes greater and greater risks to collect and dismantle land-mines to earn a living. There is also a friendship between the main character and his younger friend, who is of African descent. They live together on an abandoned ship in the middle of a river, and there is an obvious allusion to Huckleberry Finn at work.
The images in this film are stark and stunning, and the anti-war message subtle enough that it doesn't get in the way of the visual storytelling. On the whole, I thought this was a beautiful, humanist film, one that deserves to be seen far more than almost any film coming out of Hollywood now. It's a shame that it was never really distributed in the west.
Tell Your Friends