Reviews

This is about the worst movie I have seen in ages, how it has such a high rating I do not know. How did others think it was spectacular??? They have very poor references for other movies to compare to. Were these people watching the same movie I watched? I found NO redeeming material. After the first 25 minutes of foolish rhetorical gobligook I was about to throw in the towel, why I didn't I cannot say, as it went downhill fast from there. How did someone like Nicole Kidman get involved with something like this? It is a scar she will regret for the rest of her life. The script was a very very poor and failed attempt at using Old English Poetics. Also, how could so many people be involved with a movie and not tell someone they were making garbage? I am asked if this contains spoilers, how can I spoil it any more than the producers already have. Most any movie will have 9 & 10 ratings, it pleases somebody, but very few movies have so many 1 & 2 ratings, so that gives them significant weight over the 10s.

How did Miss Theron take this part in such hocus pocus make belive that plainly didn't work? She is most of my rating.

At first I just enjoyed the movie and would have rated it decently. Then it ends!

The movie had quite patiently laid out a plot with many questions not yet answered, in fact including the main factor indicating of what created all this woman's circumstances. The story proceeds and develops creating more questions than answers. We slowly learn a bit about each character and a deep shell they are in, but often not the cause, the Communist system they live in. Which you suspect is all just preparing you for the twist and reveal at the end of the movie, illuminating all.

It seems to be unwinding and a sub plot ends, adding a few more unanswered questions, much is hanging in the air and she unexpectedly returns to work. Then it ends! -- And you wonder ???

Then you realize it was not the plot the director was trying to tell, he had pulled you in with no intention of satisfying the plot. Then you think, ah yes! Character and development, they did a wonderful job of that, although they really didn't change much as you would expect in a love story, but you learned who they may be, bit by bit, as the system forced them to not expose character. They were just remote cogs in the cruel bureaucratic wheel as it turned.

You figure again, maybe not, as you really only learn wee bits and pieces about them, more questions than answers, but see the deep, sharp, cold, forced personality adaptations and voids caused by the political system in those times, which we actually see little of in the movie, although much hinges on it. Maybe it's that he was trying to tell?

Ah! you see it and realize you haven't enjoyed a movie that much in some time. You didn't need all the necessities. It had all it needed, including no last line. Rich.

Oh yes, wherever they made this movie it was beautiful.

Another apocalyptic film? Another virus to be conquered? Another hero to make? Another happy ending? Another silly silly "lets make another movie" thing.

No!! Somebody was awake this time. This movie is none of those things. Yet it is all of those things. I was just watching it, enjoying it, just like so many other films.

Then someplace -- I got lost. Then -- all of a sudden -- it was over ---- over?.

I had that hollow feeling deep inside. It can't be over? There has to be more? But what more can be said? Beautiful!!

I'll remember this one, an "experience to be savored" the loss of taste fit so well, "don't give up on this one", ya, I like that. There was a hook, someplace you get taken in, and it looks like a lot of people who were lucky enough to watch this, were hooked.

Maybe if just a little more thought on clarity? Or time on editing? Or maybe just a bit of consideration for continuity? Yes, that's it, just a little work on the script and this would have been a good "B" movie? But then maybe Soderbergh is just getting tired of these genera? Nothing new here but Gina. But she's enough. I at least was very entertained just watching her. I didn't know who she was or what she had done, so I researched, interesting. She just has a manner of presents that catches my attention. So? I enjoyed this movie anyhow. It seems I am short lines here? Although I count more. Why must one be wordy to be good? Was War and Peace to long? That's another question? For another time?

One of the most depressing movies I've seen this year? Why I say that, I am not sure, if I like it, I'm not sure? I guess I don't hate it or I wouldn't be so disturbed. So then I guess the movie did it's job. What bothers me, is? What bothers me? How can a woman be so self-destructive?

I haven't been a Michelle Williams (Margot) fan up to now, but it may be more the parts she plays than her, I'll wait and judge. Lou (Seth Rogen)? You should have much more empathy for his character, I would have felt better if I had, all I felt was compassion for Margot. Danial (Luke Kirby)? Well I either should have felt more compassion for him or I should have felt, not just seen, the selfish scoundrel he was, so I could hate him more. But I didn't get enough of either. Someone who plays with someone else's emotion, just because he can, and enjoys watching the results, is not forgiven in falling for his own selfish game. So does everyone else hate him as much as I do? To instill such emotion in me, the credit must go then to Sarah Polley and Michelle Williams, Oh! Sarah Silverman surprised me too.

A very engaging movie. It is a rather strange presentation. You know exactly what is happening but yet have no idea what is going on. That is to say the story itself, if not known before hand, is generally obvious throughout and by the end. Yet the main character Laura is never made clear what her actual involvement is. Why she is doing what she is doing. Her connection to the series of events is often confusing. I enjoyed the movie but it could have used some serious continuity improvement. Why do I have to have 10 lines? This makes ten. This makes eleven. How many more do they need? This now makes fourteen by my count.

Very little really happens in the first episode. I will have to see what develops, if I watch any more of it. They worked very hard at setting up elaborate plot twists and lines in the first episode, that will play out later, or so the creator says. But he forgot he is trying to snare his audience now, the complexities of The X-Files took a long time to build. He should have taken note and spent more time on introducing characters, situations and developing "our" intrigue, which all gets extremely muddy, as they proceeded to introduce next years 15th subplot. Who cares if it plays out later, I may never get there.

Melissa George at first appears a little droll but starts to develop interest, but there special effects people need help, especially as she looks like she couldn't fight her way out of a paper bag.

Then again, who were all those people?, it was difficult trying to keep them straight, why bother as there was little purpose, at least in this episode. I think this genre is a little too competitive for this try at a new series, I suggest Cinemax reconsider why the BBC dropped it.

I found it hard to read many of the other comments as they took this as a personal victory or a personal affront, it is only a movie.

If they had chosen to, the movie could have had many more sharp edges and portrayal of many villains. Sarah Palin will always be and interesting totally unique American political anomaly. Although the movie takes pokes at many people for their unique characters it didn't seem to me it went out of it's way to cast blame to harshly and I am sure there were many more opportunities to do so.

My comment during the movie was that Julianne Moore plays Sarah Palin better than Sarah Palin, and since so many tried to play her during the campaign, I considered that a compliment to both of them. She is the only reason the movie is of any interest.

I have always been on the fence with Sofia Coppola, always a bit peeved as maybe she was given too much, how can she be really creative? But the good always outweighed the bad, she was different and Hollywood needs a lot of that. This movie to me was no change and I watched it with skepticism. Finished it without much to be said for and the standard against things, a month or so ago. Then I remembered to add my IMDb rating, as I like to do for films I watch. Now, realizing it still weighs heavy on my state of mind and was not easily forgotten. So like Lost in Translation it did something to my subconscious, and that makes it what I watch movies for.

Why ?? Why did anyone make this movie? I almost agreed with the guy who gave it one star. Lets be realistic though, that would be vindictive. This may have been bearably entertaining, along the lines of ordinary if the characters were not so pitiful, hopeless and disgusting. The rest of the movie technicalities were decent.

A standard movie, everybody is happy in the end plot. But who are we kidding, they all have an ice cube's chance in hell, if they make any more positive - destructive decisions they won't even make it there. Aren't we supposed to feel good that they are all happy? Why?? When we know in the "two months later" they have already screwed up, are ricocheting and are destined to continue not to learn anything from life. No wonder two women wrote this sappy and hopeless chick flick plot, far stupider than a fantasy, can they deal with reality??

The only thing for me was watching Ginnifer Goodwin for the first time, enchanting, I was rooting that her character would eventually make one smart decision, but after 30 years why should she?

I should be rating this a 10 for what it is, but my rating system criteria would be screwed up.

It is be easy to say I generally agree with all the compliments given by the previous three review. I would only wonder why there are not more than three. Whether you rate it all that highly or not, it is just a very good part of American history well worth anyone seeing.

At first these people are brazen and irritating but as time goes on you begin to feel part of the family, especially as the director pulls family forbidden secrets out for discussion, where they should be, everyone is fallible and human.

I might make one minor correction, not being one and living in a Sicilian community it might be better to say Sicilian American family rather than Italian American. Oh well!!

This film scares me. Not that there is anything scary in the film, it is far too boring and slow to be scary. It's pace leaves you wondering who is retarded.

It is about two bored uninspired, possibly demented high-school underclass students making a documentary. The film is shot as if it is also their documentary, and it's overall quality reflects this. Maybe this is the films only achievement to me. Not the quality of the filming but the overall quality.

Now what scares me? That some people found a level of inspiration or quality to rate it so highly, my three is a sympathy vote.

My recommendation?, unless you are really into slow, boring, weird stuff, look further.

There are a lot of questions one might ask about this movie. One should be, why did they make it? Does anyone of them need the money? I can't see any other reason.

Evey comic premise in this movie has been used sooooo often it isn't funny anymore, even if it were done properly and worked, which nothing did work.

Both of the leads are capable and experienced, but no one even seemed into making this movie including Nicole Kidman. They all just showed up. The only one that seemed happy about doing this movie was Brooklyn Decker. One last question, where did they find those kids? The little girl is still playing Annie and the kid is supposed to be a dud, he qualifies. They must be related to someone financing the movie. Please send them back to school.

Having seen this in maybe 1996, it was a long time ago. I still remember feeling ill at ease at the acting of Reeves and even Aitana and the awkward way the plot was carried and scenes were wrenched. Now thinking about it, I remember and feel much. I wish to see this movie yet again to see why I remember the emotion I felt then, so well, so many years later. I came to like Reeves awkward style and I miss not seeing again the inner beauty of Aitana that seems to outshine her looks (not easy), I guess Italy is the luckier. It also is a fond memory for Anthony Quinn . I should try and find "The Machinist". Well then, just out of sappy compassion I gave it another star, even though I over rated it before. There is more than meets the eye.

Oh my ??? !!! I just feel very frustrated and cheated I guess. “I'm actually quite reluctant to criticize this movie because I basically agree with every sentiment it expresses” ,oh, on this I agree, I was looking forward to it. This actually deserves a two, but feeling so cheated I give it a one. What kind of hollow minds have these people that gave it 9 and 10 stars? Is it the same movie?

“An Actor's Film Of Reflection”, ?? I don’t understand, there were great actors, icons yes, I respect them but I missed the acting. Sometimes, not the meaning, but their delivery sent shivers up my spine. Live on their laurels?, high school was better and less trite.

“The film is about questions not about answers”. I have those same questions and ask them as often, I object more deeply and signed it with my blood. How dare they mock the dead for their shallow reflection?

“What kind (of movie) is it? Pretty much without a category.” Yes I agree, and without much substance.

“everything looks documentary-realistic” I refer back to my high school.

“Rangers”, obviously they failed to hire a consultant that had ever been one. The whole present impression of reality is actually, in reality, mind boggling?? They paid these people?

Trite, unimaginative, simplistic, a waste of time, stupid, slow, unrealistic, well I’ll continue reading the reviews, maybe I missed the good part, oh! I forgot shallow.

The drunks and pot heads had more reflection on war in 1968.

Should you see it? Guess what I think?

Alicia Christian Foster is by far better than this, and why did we watch this movie anyway. At least it is good to see something that has been done so often before, even done so well before, and she has virtually even done before, done again well. Even to ask this little bit of a movie is becoming so much a rarity in Hollywood. It comes out of Bollywood more often now, but then so much comes from there, how can they miss.

If you don’t figure out all the propositions, possibilities and results long before they happen, and then find yourself choosing the predictable, well maybe you’re just more adventuresome.

It is just nice to see a movie that all fits together, without big holes in the production, well acted , Terrence Howard has possibilities, and runs it’s course without herpes. Well maybe I still just love “Jodi” even though she’ll never love me, and forgive the movie its lapse anyway.

I’ll keep my expectations up, that she’ll be original and maybe a little groundbreaking depth again someday.

I’ll go with the flow and add a point for her performance, which always pulls something out worthwhile.

This contains no spoiler, as there is nothing to spoil.

I was totally lost, 7.3 ??? until I looked at some of the user rating demographics. That they are all over 7 amazed me. But, that under 15 females is almost a 9 ??, and then I noticed Marky Wahlberg, and figured after Boggie Nights and a few Clooney movies he must be a hit with the 13 female crowd. I like him, don’t get me wrong, but ??? There is little if anything here, and I’m not that old yet, but Hopalong Cassidy put a better movie together. We always here about Joaquin Phoenix, well this performance wouldn't get him through Theatre 101, Robert Duval always does the Good, the Bad and too much of the Ugly, Eva needs her edge, but ya gotta love her, but they wrote her out at the end anyway, maybe she was in jail? etc. etc.

Was anything real? Did they get any professional consultants? Any reflection to organized crime or a police department was a complete accident, certainly not even a farce, the departments won’t even get a laugh out of it, if they happen to recognize a uniform. Koch has got to be embarrassed, even with just his profile. Phoenix was a club manager?? Haven’t even one of the hundreds, no thousands of people who worked on this movie ever been in anything that even resembles a “club”? of some kind? What has movie making come to? Did this make money, legally that is? Is there some way to give it a zero? Well that’s not fair I can’t be a judge, as eventually I fast forwarded through most of the last half, just too much to take.

Then the comments? Who wrote these? Did they see the same movie? I had to go back and check just to be sure.

After sitting on this a while, my, this is good stuff that good movies are made of and, there are some big problems and holes, dilemma, left me siding with the skeptics of this movie.

With all this talent, with all this production, the director didn't take it anywhere important, although there were many delectable sinews to work with. Maybe the author did? The cynical point could have been made so much better and so much more rewarding. (a self centered, self serving, selfish soul makes all those souls around him as tragic as he is, even when it is Brad Pitt as a troubled, earthy, free spirit.) It dragged and there were so many things to cover better, there was no need to stretch it out and dwell. This did not result in a relaxing movie, as the ploy is supposed to and the soul of the movie wasn't intended to be so anyway. The characters didn't mesh and there was sooooo much character and actors to carry it. It seemed so much never got on film and if it did, it is on the cutting room floor.

This film left me hollow, waiting, missing something, when there are so many other gut wrenching tidbits that were only superficially dramatized, and some corny!!. There was good material here but it received only a Best Cinematography Oscar and was nominated for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration and Best Sound, ???? What a waste. It should have been much better.