Reviews

I loved this movie sooo much. Bjork was absolutely wonderful, and even though I'm a big fan of hers, I am doubly impressed by her work in this film. This is one of those movies that sucks you in and then spits you out. I was crying so hard at the end; I've never before felt such anguish for a fictional character. It was the deepest pain to see the sacrifice that Selma made for her son.

I'm not usually a fan of melodramatic movies, but that's only because other melodramas couldn't get me to relate to them the way that "Dancer in the Dark" did. Once in a blue moon is a movie made that is both stark and fanciful, that tells its story straight into your heart without you even realizing that you've made yourself vulnerable to it. And at the end you find yourself in such emotional disarray that all you can do is walk away from it. This was one of those movies that was so good and so moving that I don't even care to watch it again. The first time watching it left a big enough impression, thank you.

This movie was absolutely beautiful. The script was hilarious, the characters were unique, the score was infectious and the direction was sparkling youthful ingenuity.

I love this movie so much because it has to be the only movie (or one of the rare,rare movies) that made me feel this great after I saw it. It is the ultimate feel-good movie because it has ZERO amount of cheese and just the right dollop of..umm "feel-goodness" for lack of a better term.

Max Fischer is the best character I've seen on screen. What fascinates me about him is that technically he is so unreal--I don't know anyone and I can't imagine anyone being close to a Max Fischer--and yet in the movie he is made real, he is made incarnate as a believable human being--one with passions, faults, quirks, mannerisms, etc.

In my opinion the movie was really about the maturing of Max Fischer. Max Fischer was a guy boy could--and did--do anything. From his enrollment in Rushmore at age seven he was an overachieving freak, an oversuccessful success story. And in that sense, he was spoiled. Then he falls in love with Miss Cross and for the first time ever he has a goal he cannot achieve. By the end of the movie he has grown up because he lets this goal go; this shows in the resolution between him and Cross and Herman (Murray).

There were so many beautiful parts in this movie: Max's speech in his new public school (he was a fish out of water, it was hilarious); the part when Max introduces Herman to his dad, a barber and *not* a brain surgeon; Max's first meeting with Miss Cross.. Every scene in this movie is perfect; the fact that the movie doesn't drag is a major plus.

All in all, I loved this movie. I'd recommend it to anyone who enjoys a funny, feel-good movie.

by the way, can someone please give me another word for "feel-good"?!?!

It seems to me that I had a fortunate experience with this movie, unlike other people. I saw the movie in a nice theater with less than half of its seats filled, so the rest of the audience's reaction didn't affect me. It turned out that from beginning to end I was completely engrossed. Perhaps my faint-of-heartness concerning extramarital sex is really what made the movie for me. Rather than being repulsed, bored, or irritated, I was enraptured by the characters and the unfolding paths that lay before Cruise, who stumbled along (sometimes running eagerly) to the end of his dreamy,nocturnal ride.

I loved this movie. The criticisms of the wooden acting and terrible premise are criticisms of what I think are actually *great* about the movie. Kidman and Cruise did exquisite jobs--for some reason I imagine young, rich married couples in New York City to be just like them (in a Stanley Kubrick context anyway). I don't think the story is bad because it is unconventional, therefore whatever it may be missing isn't needed. The storyline--man okay, man find out something bad, man not okay, man go for a walk--is simple enough to provide room for the audience to study the character himself. The movie is nothing about a brothel conspiracy, it's nothing about the weird things that go on in the city, it's nothing about sexual exploration--it's about a basically good man and how a specific instance, no matter how small it was, can throw a man way out of balance so that his perception of things is completely changed. The plight of this man throughout the movie goes from dealing with the sudden change of his perception to accepting and enjoying his perception and finally to realizing his vertigo and striving for the ultimately righteous and moral perception.

This movie is amazing. I'd say there's a 50 percent chance you'd hate it and a 50 percent chance you'd love it. Risk the seven bucks because it's absolutely STUNNING on the silver screen and it simply won't be the same on video.

The teen movie of my generation is *not* "Valley Girl"-- it's "Clueless". I can hardly recall Bush's presidency much less Reagan's. My earliest recollection of fashion magazines does not include sun-tanned celebrities with feathered hair but rather pale, flannel-wrapped grunge girls. However, I do know enough about the valley girl phenomenon: the talk, the style of dress, the malls and gallerias, the hippy parentage, the wholesomeness, the pastels..you know what I mean. So I wasn't completely detached when I saw the movie.

So now to what I thought of it: I really really liked this movie. I even bought the video.

I think growing up surrounded by the GenX mumbo jumbo made me appreciate this light-hearted flick. It's a nice love story, kind of like a watered down Romeo and Juliet. The acting may not have been good enough for Shakespeare, but it's a movie, so it's perfectly fine that these people are "actors" and not melodramatic "thespians". Also the script was just right; it wasn't too phony, it had a sense of humor.. Examples would be Randy and his friend's visit to the valley party. The bathroom scene was ticklish.

Randy's depression and Julie's frustration and heart-to-heart with her dad were parts of the movie that didn't disappoint. In other movies of this kind the actors are often unable to carry their characters from one emotional situation to the next, and they end up making themselves unpleasantly flat. Randy and Julie have appropriate sincerity--remember, they're playing two young kids in love. The dreamy, whimsical quality of the movie fits just right.

In conclusion, this is a wonderful, timeless movie. Though the time in which it is set plays a major role in the movie, the essential love story is timeless. The great thing about this movie is that it uses a *very* common theme but still comes out fresh and affective. Even for younger viewers like me, who didn't grow up in the 80s, the movie can be just as endearing as it was to its first audiences.