Reviews written by registered user

Send an IMDb private message to this author or view their message board profile.

Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]
31 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
well done yet leaves some Qs unanswered, 12 August 2009

Technically this film was great & it was a good story. The acting was excellent, BUT... it was also an annoying film for the following reasons:

1) She seemed so intelligent, how did she also make such a stupid mistake as to leave in the middle of an opera with a married man where everyone could see her go - what was she thinking?! 2) Why was Lily so damn proud as to not accept help from 2 well-intentioned friends, one of whom actually loved her & she didn't have the sense to follow her heart! Was this realistic? (Oh ya, it's a film!) 3) Why didn't she use those damning letters to re-enter the society she craved (tho why quite frankly, when it was by and large so hypocritical, is beyond me!)? 4) And to cap it all, she decides working is just too problematic so she tops herself! What a waste! 5) Why did Lawrence not chase her more if he was really interested in her? What game was he playing at? So he annoyed me!

She seemed so clever at the beginning - I thought she'd find a way out of her troubles. Sorry but she was a complex & silly woman. (Yes, it's judgmental.)

I'm annoyed that this film has affected me days after I saw it.

7/10 from me

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Harrowing but worth the viewing - a reminder that war is never a pretty sight!, 14 May 2008

Detailing the battle on the South Pacific Island of Guadalcanal in 1943 and the Americans' final success over the Japanese, this is a most poignant and underestimated war film. Seen through the narrator, one of the American soldiers, the film's strength lies in its depiction of the harshness, misery, madness, and yet also the depth of humanity, on both sides. There are no winners here. Superb acting all round from the plethora of well-know actors, this extraordinary film leaves you pondering about life long after the credits have rolled on by.

It reminds me how fortunate I am not to have been forced to be a soldier as I could not do what so many have been, are still in parts of the world, made to do on behalf of their governments, or renegade armies. May we be forgiven for all the suffering humankind has meted out on other fellow human beings.

16 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
A touching film in these uncertain times, 14 May 2008

A film of surprising majesty mainly because of its sincerity to convey the tale of a young (American) high school student, touchingly and masterfully played by the then 12-year-old Haley Joel Osment, who, at the instigation of his new teacher's challenge to the class, comes up with a beautiful and simple plan to make a difference in the world, involving doing a good turn to not just one person but three, who then, in turn, return the gift themselves to three more people, thereby very quickly spreading goodness in both directions, in the giving and receiving, in the most unlikely places and ways. Warning: a tear-jerker!

3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Boring, 25 June 2007

Well I'm surprised so many people like Woody Allen's new British film. I only saw part of it on Foxtel tonight but walked away eventually as I was bored, disinterested in the characters, and the story is too close to his earlier film 'Crimes & Misdemeanors', which was far superior, I felt.

I also don't know what all the hoopla is with Johansson, unless you're a guy! The lead actor, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers is pretty good as the cold, selfish rags to riches kinda guy, but his darker too black to be likable for me.

Pity. I miss Woody's early, very hilarious films. Sigh. Only 1/10 from me for this film.

Good film experience, 1 April 2007

Enough positive comments have been made about this film BUT I didn't get the ending! Could someone tell me what happens at the VERY end: Who dies & who doesn't? Replies to appreciated.

I cannot think of any more to comment but I'm being asked to write 10 lines! So I hope this extra will be accepted! Does anyone else have this problem? Why can't we only write a few lines? Beats me.

Casting was good with Bale turning out the most impressive performance to date. Jackman not as impressive. Bale was the more contained & restrained. The brief appearance of ex-Gollum would have gone unnoticed had my husband not pointed it out, as with Bowie acting as Tesla, and a nice job he did too. Now that must be 10 lines surely!

4 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Very unsatisfactory film!, 8 February 2007

I usually like independent films & this is my second Ozon film which have both had Charlotte Rampling in, and unfortunately they have both been disappointing. Too long takes, too much left unclear, and essentially I was bored. (And I'm French & like slow (but they need to be good) films.) The ending is annoying & left hanging. Why? Also, Charlotte, in character, is often not very likable. For example, she could have just been aloof, and not mean, to Vincent, who was just trying to be nice & helpful.

What this film does do is give one a good idea of how NOT to be in relation to death - one should remember that one's loved ones can die at any time and one needs to be ready to let them go. But our culture doesn't like to talk, or even think, about death, even though it's all around us. How many people die each day? And one needs to grieve adequately before starting any new relationship.

Caché (2005)
6 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
mixed feelings about this one, 17 October 2006

Surprisingly for a film, I haven't seen a bad review yet for this perplexing and frustrating film, at least for me. Unlike the other reviewers, although I would agree that here we have the outline of a good story and there is a certain degree of polish overall, I also felt cheated at the end by there not being a tying up of loose ends, and ultimately, especially after watching the DVD extras about the incredible directorial control Haneke exerted on his cast and crew, I experienced an unpalatable pretentiousness about this film, unfortunately.

I remain puzzled by what was implied as having happened, as this cannot really be simply explained as being unclear. There has to be meaning behind the main events portrayed, and I think that Haneke purposefully left things muddled as he probably likes to stir (read annoy) audiences. Pity - it would have been even better with a bit more at the end. I'm not asking for much!

The Exonerated (2005) (TV)
20 out of 27 people found the following review useful:
If ever there was a film that provided food for thought..., 3 February 2006

I've just watched this film and I myself write to two inmates in American prisons, one on Death Row (DR) (and he did not commit murder), so this topic of justice v. injustice is one very close to my heart & sensibilities.

What can one say when one hears that someone has spent up to 21 yrs of his/her life for a crime he/she did not commit, and the only way they finally get off DR was from DNA exoneration.

This is a film that all policemen, the judiciary, and school kids should have to see as a matter of course, but actually I reckon all Americans should see - to realise how many innocent lives have been totally ruined or, worse, lost at the electric chair for a crime they never committed. Why, also, does the law not act, when new evidence comes to light, ie why are people not released when they are found to be innocent. What is wrong with people not standing up for the truth? Is it so hard to do? How can these people sleep at night knowing that they have done nothing with evidence that could mean an innocent person could be released? This is totally beyond my understanding! This world is weird and mad! Films such as this one prove it. But this film was also so gentle in its delivery, so lacking in anger, which everyone had every right to be. (I would certainly have been had I been in their shoes.) It was great to see such fine actors taking on a film like this. It certainly added authenticity. An important film for the world to see: that not everyone who goes to prison is guilty! 10/10, from NSW, Australia

12 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
maybe the worst film i've ever seen!, 20 October 2005

I went to see this film because enough reviewers seemed to have found it funny. Well, I certainly didn't. It was just plain dumb and the story was boring. I didn't find the main lead or the supporting cast interesting enough. The material and acting could have been better handled with a different cast or director maybe. Altogether a very disappointing film. Too much swearing and not enough laughs. And the bottom line is too much emphasis on sex anyway! No wonder some cultures look at the West with derision! I suggest you look at other comedies if you want a good laugh. Even the 1960s British 'Carry On' series is funnier than this and they touched on similar sexual themes. I'd give this film a zero if I was able to vote that low!

Closer (2004/I)
1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Very disappointing, 10 July 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I was eager to see this film but was very disappointed in the end as all 4 protagonists seemed unlikeable characters and pretty selfish to me.

I've previously enjoyed both Clive Owen & Jude Laws as actors. I didn't know if I'd like the female leads. Julia was OK & Nathalie was almost believable, but I don't think I'd be friends with these kinds of people.

Some things didn't add up: why did Jane lie about her name to Larry but not to Dan?

I was surprised by the looseness of their 'love' for each other. No wonder relationships go haywire! Ultimately this was a bit pretentious. Maybe the play works better.


Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]