Reviews (35)

Had An Unforgettable Summer? It Can't Compare To Cathy's!
Tennessee Williams SOUTHERN GOTH masterpiece a la dark black and white Hollywood film style with Joseph (All About Eve, Guys & Dolls) Mankiewicz at the director's helm and screenplay adapted by Gore Vidal.

Elizabeth Taylor plays beautiful and crazy Cathy and Mercedes McCambridge (the actress who provided the voice of the demon in The Exorcist) plays her protective mother. Katherine Hepburn is Auntie Venable and wants niece Cathy to have a lobotomy to help her forget what she witnessed in regards to her son and Cathy's cousin, Sebastian and his untimely & somewhat mysterious "death" involving Sebastian's sexual secrets...

This all happened in front of Cathy's young & virginal eyes, "Suddenly, Last Summer". Last summer, Cathy and Sebastian travelled to Europe on an extravagant, decadent & obviously quite hedonistic vacation. Cathy was already quite traumatized by a baby tea turtle massacre on a European beach but what happened to cousin Sebastian was something that broke her fragile mind.

Auntie Venable gets the help of Dr. Cukrowicz, played by Montgomery Clift to see if he can help poor Cathy out with a prescibed lobotomy and mainly to save the selfish & overbearing Mrs. Venable from having people know about her son's secrets that got him killed.

From the opening scene, the viewer is riveted to the screen and left wondering... wondering... WHAT really happened so suddenly, last summer? The film builds and builds into the last 20 minutes of this film where Taylor gives a tremendous soliliquy and overview of just what DID happen to poor Sebastian. The split-screen effect that is used in this ending scene is fabulous. You never see Sebastian so what you are conjuring up in your mind is MUCH MORE horrific than they could have filmed back then. Wonderful cast with excellent performances from all but Clift who was quite medicated during the grueling shoot due to an accident before filming. If you are a Tennessee Williams, Elizabeth Taylor or Katharine Hepburn fan this is a MUST SEE!

Happy Watching!

Disturbingly Seductive
This 1959 film adaptation of the Tennessee William's play was intelligently scripted by the playwright and Gore Vidal. Set in the 1930's south, effectively shot in black and white, and skillfully directed by Joseph L. Mankiewitz. The film has a slow and sometimes tedious pace but still spins a web that ultimately draws you in like a good mystery. For the most part the cast is well chosen. Katherine Hepburn gives a delicate unraveling performance as the shrewd, manipulative and tragically obsessive mother of the never seen central character Sebastian. Mercedes McCambridge is superb as the weak and greedy mother of the film's heroine Catherine. Elizabeth Taylor shines as the emotionally traumatized heroine Catherine and gives one of her most overlooked and underrated performances, culminating in a superbly acted tour de force monologue that reveals the truth surrounding Sebastian's death. Ironically it is Montgomery Clift who is the weakest link in this ensemble and seems miscast in the role of the Doctor who must decide Catherine's fate. On another note, in the scene where Catherine has been transferred to a new hospital, and allowed for the first time in a great while to wear her own clothes and have her hair done, we are joltingly reminded of how absolutely breathtakingly beautiful Miss Taylor was.

An Underrated Classic
What more could a movie buff ask for? Elizabeth Taylor, Katharine Hepburn and Montgomery Clift; 3 great actors of film in ONE movie! I am a 20 year old college student and let me tell you that there is just something about this movie that captures me. I LIKE this film very much. This movie is complex, yet understated but if anything is to entice you to buy this movie, it should be the performaces. Both Hepburn and Taylor were nominated for Oscars for thier roles here and it is easy to see why; their performances are brilliant and mesmerizing. Clift is also good here too, but the film truly belongs to the two female stars. If this film was good enough to capture a 20 year olds attention, then that should be proof as to just how good the movie and the performances in it are! The DVD also features stills from the movie, is available in both widescreen and full screen and also features bios on all the stars!

LOBOTOMIZE YOUR DAUGHTER - MAKES THE PROBLEM GO AWAY!
"Suddenly Last Summer" is a Southern gothic tale about a gaddabout dame (Elizabeth Taylor) who saw something so frightening while on a vacation in Greece that it made her go nuts. How do you solve a problem like Elizabeth? Well that's easy - you cut half her brain out. At least that's what Katharine Hepburn would like to do. Montgomery Clift, as the sympathetic doctor, has other ideas however. This is high camp and low melodrama but strangely enough it works - and brilliantly so.

TRANSFER: Columbia gives us an average transfer. The grayscale is a bit off with too low a contrast level that registers most scenes in tonal gray instead of true black and white. Age related artifacts are everywhere. Ditto for a hint of compression related digital artifacts and some minor edge enhancement. The audio is MONO but nicely balanced.
EXTRAS: NONE! If you've purchased more than two Columbia Classics you should be used to this skimy treatment by now!
BOTTOM LINE: This is compelling cinema on the verge of a crying gag. It plays like Shakespeare mixed with Barnum and Bailey at I highly recommend it for this reason alone!

Consider other Williams' offerings first
This film is a solid Tennessee Williams/Joseph Mankieowitz
collaboration. It will appeal most to those who enjoy films from the heyday of the dialogue-laden melodramas (late 50's-early 60's). Having said that, this film is ultimately inferior to pictures like Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Streetcar.., the Long Hot Summer, and Who's Afraid of V. W. The dialogue is not nearly as crisp in this film, although it does have a fairly engaging plot. We are exposed to different perspectives on the truth, as well as controversial themes (for the time) such as homosexuality and female sexuality. Other pluses include innovative camera angles throughout, and the split-screen perspective of the final scene, in which we never see Sebastian's face.
One thing that hurt this film was Montgomery Clift's disturbingly shaky performance (both figuratively and literally). He was unable to hold his own in any of his scenes with Liz Taylor or Katherine Hepburn, and seemed both distracted and physically weak. Perhaps he already was, even in 1960. It was also impossible to believe that anyone in their right mind could deem Liz Taylor was an incorrigeable case; obviously, the audience needed to be drawn to her and the plot needed drama, but both should have been possible without loss of plausibility. (I don't attribute this to Taylor's acting by the way; her performance here was stronger than Hepburn's). The film also treats the symptoms of, and recovery from, psychological trauma in a grossly oversimplified way. The same though could be said of Spellbound, The Manchurian Candidate, and just about any other 'mental illness film' from the era.
Vertigo alone is perhaps above the fray in that regard, as it is in so many other respects. ... Read more

Reviews (101)

A Visual Masterpiece & An Extraordinary Film!
Watching "Girl With A Pearl Earring" is like walking into one of Johannes Vermeer's exquisite paintings. Eduardo Serra's cinematography is brilliant and captures, remarkably, the luminescent quality of light in Delft - the same light which Vermeer so skillfully put to use in his masterpieces. Serra's visuals give us a glimpse of what Holland must have been like in 1665. Through Director Peter Webber's camera we view scenes as if they are painted on canvas - the shimmer of silk cloth, of water in the canals, of the sun on snow; the haze of sunlight through clouds, light through a window; the brilliance of color contrasted with dark shadows; scenes as beautifully composed as a great painting. Daylight, candle and shadow are used dramatically. The atmosphere is as rich as an artist's palette.

Not much is known about the Dutch master, who lived and worked in 17th century Delft. Only 35 of his paintings survive. Among these works, perhaps his greatest, is the portrait, "Girl With A Pearl Earring." Director Webber has transformed Tracy Chevalier's novel, of the same name, into this extraordinary movie for the big screen.

Scarlett Johansson is superb as the young servant girl, Griet, who is sent to the Vermeer household to work after her father has an incapacitating accident. The labor is pure drudgery and seemingly endless, with little pay and fewer thanks. Since the Vermeers are dependent on wealthy patrons to commission paintings, money is tight and Vermeer's young wife is pregnant almost every year. Griet's work is made more difficult by jealous coworkers, the brood of spoiled Vermeer children, the suspicious wife and her manipulating mother, (Essie Davis), who holds the purse strings tightly.

Griet's unusual intelligence begins to show, as does her curiosity and sensitivity. She is fascinated by Vermeer's work and the world of light and color. She wonders, at one point, whether to wash the murky studio windows and risk losing the precious quality of muted light. This is not just an ordinary maid. She has a quality of stillness and purity about her which attracts Vermeer, (Colin Firth is wonderful as the brooding artist), as well as his super rich, lecherous patron, (Tom Wilkinson). Eventually, Griet is pressured to sit for a portrait, which will, centuries later, be marveled at.

The production design and period settings are award-worthy. Olivia Hetreed's screenplay is excellent. She places as much emphasis on silence as she does on dialogue and the result is extremely effective. And the cast is exceptional. Johansson's and Firth's performances are nuanced and subtle.

Vermeer is one of my favorite artists and I have traveled far to see his available work. I watched "Girl With A Pearl Earring" twice in as many days. It is a wonderful movie and an extraordinary visual experience. A must see!
JANA

Repressed love perfected by Firth & Johansson...
Before seeing it, the film seems straightforward. Just about a girl with pearl earring in her ear lobe, right? No. The film tries to look deeper into Vermeer's stunning painting by offering Chevalier's interpretation of who the young girl was. However, where the film succeeds is flexibly creating a tentative but emotionally explosive relationship between master and servant - Firth and Johansson.

Set in 17th century in the Netherlands, the film begins calmly, carefully unravelling itself to the viewer so that one can absorb it visually and mentally. The pace can be seen as slow but this type of film needs that type of pace to make it work because if it was fast, how could we as the viewers enjoy the tentative, innocent and beautiful love that Griet and Vermeer share?

Scarlett Johansson plays Griet, the quiet and demure Dutch maid that invokes anger, jealousy and confusion in Catherina's heart (Essie Davis) while indirectly capturing Johannes Vermeer's attention (Colin Firth) and Master van Ruijven sleazy eye (acted with pure sinisterness by Tom Wilkinson). In one aspect, what ensues makes the film very good in my eyes because it portrays the issues of the impressive supporting cast such as Cornelia's blatant antagonism towards Griet, Catherina's undeniable envy and Pieter's unrequited interest in Griet while simultaneously using them as a platform to present the perfect example of repressed love between two people who know that they are worlds apart.

Johansson was simply magnificent in this film. I will be surprised and annoyed if she does not get an Oscar nomination because she played this part with such precision, it is hard to see another woman who could match her emotive performance.

Firth always delivers but this time, he was sublime. Like Johansson in terms of intensity, Firth was outstanding as the pensive but caring painter who appeared as if he was preoccupied with a certain someone.

The brilliance of this film does not only stem from the actors, the cinematography is a visual feast for the eyes and the soundtrack fits the shy mood of the film.

Slight apprehension before walking into the cinema. Delight after enjoying it, Frustration that Firth & Johansson are meant to be but as fate wants, do not find their way to each other.

Superb
This was one of the best movies that I've seen in years. A magnificent, sensuous, and yet amazingly subtle film.

So Beautiful!
Colin Firth and Scarlett Johansson star in Girl With a Pearl Earring which both of these people gradually become attracted to one another. First off I just loved how the movie was filmed. It made me really sucked into a big glimpse how the 1600's was like. The art direction, cinematography, and the costume designs were marvelous and deserved to be nominated for the Oscars in those categories. The music was enchanting which made the movie even more beautiful. Last but certainly not least I loved the acting too. Scarlett Johansson played a very polished performance and Colin Firth did a wonderful job as the mysterious painter. Love it! Love it! The only thing I will criticize with the DVD is the bonus materials. There isn't enough there. Only two things! But otherwise, this was an EXCELLENT movie. Watch it!

Just like the painting
This film was nominated for three academy awards: Art Direction, Costume Design, and Cinematography. Unfortunately for it, The Return of the King, and Master & Commander, were also nominated for those categories. Stiff competition.

Mind you, this film was a marvelous evocation of its period and of Delft (they actually filmed there, amongst other places), from the cutting of the vegetables in the opening scene to the vividly and beautifully painted interior lid of the harpsichord played by Vermeer's mostly unhappy wife. We even have a powerful sense of smell, from Griet's rejection of the meat for not being fresh, to the dumping of garbage into the river (street) outside their home. This is where the movie succeeded brilliantly - in sensory images. And that's appropriate, as the movie is about one of the greatest works of art by one of the world's greatest artists.

Scarlet Johansson once again plays the role of a younger woman whose fate is entwined with an older man, but - and sorry to all of you fans of Lost in Translation - this is simply a better, more believable film. Her character, Griet, is a poor girl sent to work in the home of Vermeer, and from the moment she sets foot into Vermeer's studio (to clean it, of course) you can sense her relation to his work. The very first indication we get of this is when she asks Vermeer's wife if she should clean the windows. The wife has no idea why this should be important, but when Griet informs her that it would affect the lighting, Vermeer's wife says yes, of course. We see that Vermeer has a wife and mother-in-law who care nothing for his art, who see him as a meal ticket. Here he is seen as almost maddeningly misunderstood, and although allusions are drawn to perhaps a previous indiscretion with a serving girl, it is Griet's character who understands him. Indeed, she took it upon herself to move a chair away from the set of one of his paintings, and explained later that it appeared to be blocking her (ostensibly, Griet, for the painting was inspired by her cleaning of the studio windows) in. We see that immediately after this, Vermeer paints the chair out of the picture.

However, there were flaws. Griet's "love interest", Pieter, has at most ten minutes of screen time. I was perplexed at his inclusion, and could only guess that he existed for one reason: that when Griet felt sexual tension occurring between her and Vermeer, she instead ran to Pieter. Whatever her reasons for that were, she kept them quiet. Her dialogue was limited to very few lines, and she communicated mostly through her eyes. Perhaps this was done on purpose, to call to mind the painting that gives the film its name. Unfortunately, in a film, more communication is necessary than in a painting. I would have liked to see her character more interactive. But that's just my tiny, humble opinion.

As a side note, for anyone interested in young adult books, an excellent book was just released, Chasing Vermeer, which is available here on amazon.com. It's kind of a Da Vinci Code for kids, and although it's for young adults, the scholarship on Vermeer is top notch. ... Read more

Reviews (77)

I missed McCourt's narrative
Oh, well. Maybe next time. Being one of the legions of fans of the book, I also came to the film with high expectations, and most were statisfied, at least as far as cinematography and acting go. Emily Watson was very good, and the three boys playing the various stages of Frank were wonderful. I question the film's attempt to positively portray some of the characters, for example the grandmother who, by McCourt's account, was a mean-spirited old woman who treated the children quite badly. However, in a tale so oppressive, I guess there must be some redeeming traits, at least in Hollywood.

What I missed most of all was McCourt's rambling, Joycean narrative and light tone which makes the book such a joy. His accepting, wistful, voice permeates every aspect of the written story and, more than any of his personal triumphs, it is this calm, all-forgiving voice, looking back from many years later, which is the shining ray of hope in the end. I sorely missed this, and found myself overcome by the appropriately squalid scenery.

Another problem I have with the film is the uninspired score by John Williams. Is this man even going to try anymore? Some of Hollywood's younger composers surely could have provided a more interesting and evocative accompaniment. Williams' dull ideas, repeated ad nauseam, had no more place in this film than his quasi-klezmer tunes had in Schindler's List.

Overall, Angela's Ashes was a fine effort in film, made anemic by the absence of McCourt's narration. It was inevitable that a book so popular be snatched up by Hollywood, but I will not go out of my way to see it again. I'd rather let the written word carry me away...

WHAT ASHES? SHOULD PERHAPS HAVE BEEN LEFT AS A BOOK
I have not read the eponymous book, and after watching this despondent drivel I probably won't. One can just hope that the book did a more honest job of potraying Angela's memoirs.

The film is set in Limerick, which, from the looks of it, is in the middle of an incredibly wet rainforest. Two brothers grow up with a mother who struggles and begs to keep her family alive and together. The predictably antisocial father squanders every bit of money he ever earns on truckloads of alcohol.

We are shown slices of life in the coming-of-age up process, and how Frank finally gets the money to leave Ireland and come to America. The boys were no cherubs, but they survived without getting into too much trouble, and became literary lions in America. That's pretty much it.

The acting is good, especially by the boy who plays the teenage version of Frank McCourt. The cinematography stretches and scampers to be oh-so-noir, and is thus overwrought with dark pigmented colors almost all of the time. Background music is run of the mill, one that you would typically expect from movies of this nature.

What boggles me though is the touchy-feely title of the book/movie: Angela (the mother) does not die. Or did I miss something? Where are the ashes?

Does justice enough for me!
Overall, I think the film does justice to the book as justice as a film can do. Obviously, the film cannot convey the powerful emotion though to the viewer as well as the book does. The actors did a brilliant job, especially Emily Watson and teenage Frank McCourt, played by the attractive Michael leg. The film won my commpassion just as the book did. The sogginess of the settings perhaps slightly puts you off a visit to Ireland. Though it is also enriched with history, and the acrhitectual structures are simply amazing. The ending leaves you hanging, as when the film came to a conclusion I felt deeply unsatisfied. Someone tell Mr.Parker to get of his behind and make something of the sequel 'Tis!

Mediocre movie of a classic book! READ THE BOOK!
Emily Watson is one of my favorite screen actresses and here she does not disappoint. She gives a wonderfully undertated performance. Robert Carlyle is also very good as he usually is. The boys also give really nice performances.

The filmmakers do bring the wet locations to life - very much as they are imagined in the book.

The major thing missing is the "tone" of the book. The book is hilarious - you laugh at the innocence of the boys point of view. Share his triumphs and sad at the set backs. That is what does not work about this movie.

Also they left out a characted in the book (the little girl in the hospital) which was one of my favorite parts.

Skip the film - read the book.

Wonderful Book, Awful movie
I loved this book so much. I was so in depth to every page. I read the book for my junior class book chat. I am so happy that I picked that book to read. The movie on the other hand, left out so many details. I recommend not watching the movie after reading the book. It will dissappoint you. Go ahead and watch the movie if you never read the book it might be very good to you. I am not much of a book reader, but I love to watch movies but this movie was really not good. Sorry to Mr. Frank McCourt who wrote such a wonderful book that his movie had to be so bad. ... Read more

Reviews (32)

Keep feeding the hole / Very dark movie
A very dark film about a man's love, greed, and moral dilemma. Gary Oldman plays a crooked cop named Jack Grimaldi who is cheating on his wife, stealing money from the FBI working for the mob giving up key witnesses for a payoff. His character still has emotion and morals in himself which he struggles with and yet is still likeable in a strange way. He gets in a jam when the key witness he supposed to catch he's also supposed to kill. He comes up with a plan to have the russian sick Mona Demarkov fake her death by giving her a fake death certificate for money in return. But this plan back fires. The fight scene with him and Demarkov in the car is intense. By the end he is left to his own devices but makes it out okay in his own way. A story about one man's struggle with greed vs moral. One of my favorite films.

Sex, drugs,money and the Journey to Hell
Lena Olin gives a great performance as a cold blooded Russian mob boss. The short version of this movie? Gary Oldman plays a currupt cop who is seduced by Olin. She plays the most devilish character I've ever seen. She convinces the Oldman character to give up his wife,mistress and way of life for cash and some affection. It's a [heck] of a ride. Run out and buy this one. This one can stand up to repeated viewings.

THIS MOVIE HAS STYLE AND SUBSTANCE. IN THAT ORDER.
What a tragic waste of such a great cast.

The film's self-absorption with creating high octane noirish melodrama does it in. As though the directors have seen and savoured a lot of neo-noir stuff, which allows them to be sardonic about it.

The end product is shocking, violent, and more often than often simply over-the-top. That covers pretty much all that one could remember it for. Oodles of sexual games, sadistic antics and titillating come-ons. The soundtrack provides sporadic respites.

Which makes for a semi-decent flash in the pan. Problem is, someone lost the recipe.

a great movie
critics are often undecided until they see how others react because they are stupid take dracula 92 laughed at at first now those same critics call it the greatest horror movie of our times and say that gary oldman deserved an oscar well here u go again another great acting job by gary oldman whose a crooked cop trying to not let his loved ones findout when hes suddenly in a cat and mouse game with a russian hitman a great movie try it out

Romeo Is Bleeding From His Foot: A Compelling Thriller
REVIEW BY NICK EVANGELISTA:
The Female Villian in this film is spooky beyond words. You just have to see her. This film works from start to finish. ... Read more

Reviews (90)

A small gem
A heartwarming comedy. The story of a boy age 7, who is confused as to whether he is a boy or a girl. He has a penchant for wearing his sister's dresses and playing with dolls. The boy, played by George Du Fresne is very endearing and radiates innocence, which remains despite hostility towards him from other members of his community due to his unusual dressing habits. The film has a similar type of charm to another French film 'Amelie', The lead characters in both films are quintessentially good and kind. Hollywood rarely, if ever makes films like this. When attempts are made they usually fall into the trap of too much sentimentality, too little understanding of the outsider, the oddball and the quirky.

The film is subtitled, but there is something poetic about the French language and the viewer assimilates the background dialogue as if by osmosis. In fact I could probably watch this without subtitles, despite understanding very little French, simply because the scenes and characters are so visually captivating. The film is topical as well, with the rise of the far right in France comparable to the bigotry that the main character faces from his community, due to their strict conservative values.

( review by Melchizedeck )

Adverse sexuality in society (Ma Vie en Rose)
Ma Vie en Rose is a provocative film about a young boy that urns to be a girl and the struggle that he and his family go through in order for him to find himself.

The young boy, Ludovic, feels so strong that he is a girl that he goes to extreme lengths to prove his sincerity. He wears dresses, make up, and watches a show that is equivalent to America's Barbie. He prefers to play with dolls than army men and dances over playing sports. Though Ludovic is anatomically male, everything he does is expressed as female. He even tries to kiss another boy. This action does not make him gay. Because he believes so sincerely that he is a girl, all of his actions seem normal to him.

The neighbors have a different idea of what Ludovic is. They call him "bent" and ban him from their homes and families. At first, Ludovic's parents are accepting and allow his behavior, but as it intensifies, they begin to worry and send Ludovic to a psychologist, who can offer little help.

Ludovic then goes to stay with his grandmother, the only person that accepts him for him. His parents are forced to move to another town after Ludovic's father loses his job, most likely because of Ludovic's behavior. After this move, his parents start to try and accept Luovic, but with little results and Ludovic starts to try and act more like a boy. Things seem to be going well, until a neighborhood girl has a costume party and forces Ludovic to switch costumes with her. Ludovic's mother flips out and tries to hurt him. When she is pulled off of him, she wanders the streets until she sees a 'Barbie' billboard. The billboard helps to show her what Ludovic is really like, a sweet, confusioned little boy looking for guidance, and she holds him for the first time since the problems began.

These reactions to adversity, in terms of sexuality, are faced regularly by a wide range of people. The film tries to portray them to the extreme, and does it well, making this movie on the edge of new generation of film.

Magnificent
I have never seen a more beautiful and innocent movie. Everything is realistically displayed through the eyes of a 7 year old boy, Ludovic. He believes himself to be a "girlboy" because god accidentally dropped his X chromosome into the trash which ultimately turned Ludovic into a boy. The movie is heartwrenching, but remains completely innocent. The whole atmosphere is innocense. I cried so hard while watching the movie. As the film progresses, Ludovic becomes less himself, choosing things based on other people's judgements than his own. He begins to become more timid, introverted, and tortured. His spirit is killed by everyone around him, especially his mother who supported him in the beginning. His mom cuts his hair; an asset that made him feel more feminine, making him vulnerable. The most painful scene to watch was when Ludovic went down the stairs to go outside due to the havoc his sister and brothers were causing. His mother sneered at him and asked "Where are you going?" ludovic answers that he is going outside to take a walk because his siblings are too noisy. His mother glares at him and says without any heart "It's not our fault we had to move" referring to the fact that Ludovic's "girlboy" tendencies made the neighborhood turn on the family. Ludovic stares at his mother for a second, then nods gently and leaves. His sadness really resonates. Ludovic is all alone, and no one cares. His brothers allow him to be beat up in his presence by the soccer team. His mother continually bashes him verbally saying that he ruined everyone's lives, and that everything negative was his fault. it's disgusting what society can do to such an innocent, loving boy. But it's real, and that's what is sick about the world.

i recommend this movie to everyone. you'll love it. this is the environment we let people survive in. it's disgusting how much negativity is pushed upon the fragile shoulders of little 7 year old Ludovic.

Ma Vie En Rose
What do you call a girl who would rather play sports than color? What about a girl who prefers shorts to dresses? Some might answer "normal" while others will answer "a tomboy." Nevertheless, tomboys are a common phenomenom who are fortunate enough to have no social stigmas attached to them. Find a boy who prefers to dance and wear dresses, however, and you are dealing with a sick child with homosexual tendencies. The double standard is both apparent and completely unfair. Ma Vie En Rose examines the role of sexual stereotypes in today's culture while showing how certain elements in society encourage conformity and inhibit diversity.

Seven year-old Ludovic is a boy who wants to be a girl. He likes to wear dresses and talks of marrying another young boy by the name of Jerome. Ludovic's family, who have recently moved into a new neighborhood, are embarassed by Ludovic's actions and struggle to suppress his transexual yearnings. Though Ludovic's actions are surprising to viewers, it is still more interesting to examine the panopticon his family is part of. Ludovic's father, Pierre, does not know how to best cope with his son's tendencies. Ludovic's sometimes embarassing displays of femininity threaten to derail his father's career, as Jerome happens to be Pierre's employers son (yikes!).

Those who assume that Ludovic is gay have missed the point of this film entirely. Sexuality isn't even an issue, especially at Ludovic's age. Ma Vie En Rose isn't concerned with Ludovic's eventual sexual orientation. The film is careful to keep its focus within childhood. Ludovic likes to wear dresses and makeup. He associates these things as the traits of women, and for this reason, feels he needs to marry Jerome. In an idealistic world, Ludovic would be able to enjoy these things without giving up on his masculinity. In the real world, however, Ludovic must unconsciously choose sides. He chooses the "feminine" because the restrictions of socialization give him no other option. This film is a bright (so bright in its use of color, it would make Barbie sick) and intelligent film which instead of asking why, asks why not?

Plaintive and dishearteningly honest
The representation of what is fantasy versus "real life" in this film serves to highlight the perception of how the transgendered main character, named Ludovic, comes to clash with the Parisian perception of what it is to be "bent." In doing so, Ludo brings his adoration of the barbie-esque Pam, his family, his friendship with neighbor children to clash with their societal vision of how gendered children should act. Some of his attempts to understand how a boy or girl should act play out as a comedy of errors with tragic results, have a significant negative impact on Ludo's life.

This film orchestrates commentary on the way in which the genders are impressed upon children via the media and cultural indoctrination; the way in which the female is surveyed by the masculine decision makers and how women affect their world through presence and men affect the world through action (surveyors/surveyed).

In summary, this is a difficult picture to watch without internalizing the strife the transgendered child evokes, and is a surefire way to heat up some discussion on the topic. ... Read more

Reviews (43)

A Gem In All Respects
Mikael Salomon's "A Far Off Place" is a marvelous example of how skilled direction and production can turn a good story into a great film. Performances in the major roles are all excellent, and Ethan Embry's portrayal of the disgruntled, fish-out-of-water city boy forced into the wilds of Africa walks a delicate line (between authentic teenage muddle-headedness and just plain obnoxiousness) beautifully.

Critics may claim the film is a little two-dimensional, and in fairness, they are right. But by not trying to make the film too grand through obvious artifice, the good performances and great scenery let this film become memorable in a simple, direct way that's very much in harmony with the essence of the story: we don't always get to choose our circumstances, and how we react in those times may literally become a matter of life and death.

Two other minor themes help make this a favorite: the Reese Witherspoon character is a great role model for any young girl - sensitive and feminine without being a wimpy or dependent ingrate; and a rare and even-handed portrayal of the firearm as a tool - no better or worse than the purpose to which it is put by a human master.

Story of Courage, Hope and Love
A Far Off Place is the sequel to the bestseller by Laurens Van der Post, 'A Story Like The Wind'. Hunters Drift is a farm in Matabeleland (today part of Zimbabwe)

It is the home of Pierre Paul Joubert known affectionately by all who live there as 'Ouwa', where European, Matabele and Bushmen live in harmony with each other , and with the great flora and fauna of Africa.
This is before the forces of destruction and death, Marxist terrorists, massacre the whole population of Hunter's Drift , as they carve a path of blood through Southern Africa.
The only survivors are Ouwa's teenage son, Francois, Nonnie, the young daughter of a colonial governor and his Portuguese wife, both murdered by the terrorists and Francois' beloved hunting dog, Hintza. They are joined by a young Bushman, Xhabbo, and his wife, Nuin Tarra.

The four young people and brave dog , must pass through bush and desert , to safety , while pursued by the cold-blooded killers.

'A Far Off Place' is a heartwarming story of love hope and courage, and of survival against overwhelming odds. It is about the fine balance between all living creatures.
Not least it highlights the death and suffering caused so many times by those forces of evil that hide behind the slogans of revolution and 'Liberation'.

I loved this movie, it was great. And am thrilled . . .
I loved this movies and am thrilled about its release on dvd. Unfortunatley, as I have been noticing a lot lately, the cover advertises this as an "early" Reese Witherspoon film. Give me a break! All I see lately are DVDs being advertised for the people who star in them, as opposed to the film themsleves. An actor is important, but so is content, and in this case, so are the other two leads in this film, Sarel Bok and Ethan Randall/Embry. Being an early Reese film should not give her automatic top billing because she has become so popular lately. The original cover for the video release years ago was much better. Anyways, I've whined enough, the cover is just anoying, but the film is quite good and one of my favorites. Although reading some other reviews, it is sorely lacking from other perspectives. I bought the books for my neice, and I guess will have to get them for myself so i can draw a proper comparison between the two mediums. Good film, good acting, lack of reality not withstanding.

Warning! Spoiler: The irony of the Disney world view
Disney does it again! They manage to turn two beautiful, compelling books into a story of squabbling American adolescents. I find it supremely ironic that Disney felt it necessary to turn a murderous troop of Marxist guerrillas into a murderous, greedy mining agent - this from one of the most devouring, money-hungry corporations in the history of capitalism! Did they perhaps believe that depicting a troop of black soldiers ruthlessly slaughtering the boy's family wouldn't be as politically correct (or as comprehensible to a pre-teen or early teen audience) as showing a greedy white mining agent ruthlessly slaughtering the boy's family? Of course, Francois Joubert simply has to be transformed into the obnoxious Harry Winslow (to make the movie more appealing to an American audience). And must every story involving young people of opposite sexes be turned into a "Girls are stupid! - Boys are stupider! - I love you! - I love you too!" tale of teenage battle of the sexes turned to love? It's been many years since I read the novels, but I don't remember that particular twist to the story, perhaps because Van der Post wasn't necessarily writing for the 11-14-year-old American market. If you're at all disenchanted with the world as Mickey sees (and sanitizes) it, skip the movie and read the books ("A Story Like the Wind" and "A Far Off Place").

A great family film
I saw this movie about two years ago! it captured my heart and kept my attention the hole time! the characters are well made and you gotta love the little dog... i had never thought about looking here for this movie... "A far off place" is a must see for all! ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Worth watching
If you've never seen any of the Sharpe films, you may want to view the previous chapters to avoid confusion. Sharpe runs into old enemies and new in this one. Obadiah Hakeswell,a name from Sharpe's past, (as portrayed by Pete Postlethwaite)almost steals the limelight from Sean Bean.(See SHARPE'S COMPANY for their first "reunion") Hakeswell kills Theresa, Sharpe's wife, near the end of the film, in a short but brutal scene. I for one would have liked to have seen Theresa give Hakeswell a royal arse kicking first, then have Obediah's treachery bring about her demise. (Maybe have Theresa poised for the kill, only to have Hakeswell blindside her) The plot is a tad silly at times, but it IS based on historical fact. Some of the characters come across a little hokey, but are patterned on real persona. And of course there is the menacing Major Duco, (admirably played by Feodore Atkins) who somehow is always foiled by Sharpe. If you like a little "skin" mixed with your swashbuckling, we have Elizabeth Hurley, (who plays a whore to a British Colonel) before she became Austin Power's love interest.

Excellent history, excellent story
Bernard Cornwell's stories of Richard Sharpe do a fantastic job of bringing Napoleonic warfare to the screen. As a special unattached officer serving Wellington, this is one of Sharpe's most exciting adventures. He has to effect the rescue of two hostages, the wives of both an English and French officer, defeat a desperate band of deserters led by his nemesis, Hakeswill, then fight off a French reconaissance force. He does it in the usual style -- a little bluff, a little swashbuckling, and some brilliant tactics. One of the most enjoyable scenes is the one in which a French general explains to the wife of one of his officers how Napoleonic combined arms tactics work using peas on a plate -- then Sharpe promptly undoes his tactics. This is one of the most compelling and exciting films of the entire series.

Bad Movie? No Way!!!
Let me just get to the point... Sharpe's Enemy is my favorite Sharpe movie in the series (and I have seen all of them).Quite frankly, I have no idea why the reviewer a couple reviews below could rate this series 1 star and say it has not a single good actor in it... Sean Bean is superb in the role of Richard Sharpe (and this holds true for all episodes). Pete Postlethwaite is my favorite villan as the monsterous Obediah Hakeswill and Daragh O'Malley is as steady as ever as Sharpe's dependable sergent. In short, Sharpe's Enemy has one of the best ensemble casts ever assembled!More importantly, the story, based on the superb Bernard Cornwell novel, is gripping and action packed. Quite frankly, TV does not get better than this... I have watched this TV movie tens of times and I still am thrilled every time.I highly recommend Sharpe's Enemy and the rest of the Sharpe's series. Also recommended if you like these kinds of movies is the Horatio Hornblower series. Very similar kinds of storylines (with equally good group acting), but at sea...

Major Sharpe Rules
I hate to use a title like this, but Richard Sharpe rules. Yet again he has to prove that he is just as capable an officer as the bought officers. Again he rises to the challenge. This is probably the best of the 4 DVD's that are released so far. There certainly was more action in this one (not that other's are lacking in the action department). The DVD is really good. The picture quality is good for being from a TV show and the sound is really good too. Again, I'll say that it would have been better had it been done in Dolby 5.1, but oh well. I'll take a good story and acting over effects any day.

Bad Movie
This is not a good movie !!!!!!!!! in fact, one of the worst movies I ever seen. I heard about this movie by a friend, thet sad it was a pretty good movie. But when I saw it , it was not good at all, not one good actor/actress

I can't recomend anyone to see this movie. ... Read more

Description

John Cleese is hilarious as the descendant of Sherlock Holmes in this modern detective drama of international power politics and intrigue. Unlike his illustrious grandfather however, this Sherlock Holmes only succeeds in bungling every job he organizes. Also stars Arthur Lowe as the "bionic" grandson of Dr. Watson, Stratford Johns as the Commissioner of Police, and Connie Booth as Mrs. Hudson. ... Read more

Reviews (9)

Pun-itive Measures...
This is a non-stop pun fest.
Filled with sight-gags, puns, take-offs, wonderfully overdone japes, pokes, ribs and alliteration.
From the opening shot(s) [really] through the "Herb Jar lables" on to the crossword bit...
One finally comes to the "Solid Gold Woofer"... and the climactic "But Holmes..."
I dearly love it.

Yes it's stupid, but...
It is a very stupid movie, but it has moments of great hilarity and Cleese is in great form. The who's the real Watson scene is worth the price of the DVD alone. Holmes:One of you is an imposter! Watson:Good Lord! Is it me?

Goofy, with lots of familiar faces
When Dr. Henry Gropinger (a caricature of Henry Kissinger, played by Ron Moody), has his diary stolen, causing him to be killed, the finest detectives of the world discover than the one behind it is Professor Moriarty's descendent. Who else can they call for help but the descendent of Sherlock Holmes, Arthur Sherlock Holmes (John Cleese)? With the incredibly stupid Dr. William Watson (Arthur Lowe) in tow, he sets a trap that Moriarty cannot resist. Sadly, this Holmes is only a pale shadow of his illustrious grandfather, and his combination of quick-action and slow-thinking do not serve him well. [Color, released in 1977, with a running time of 56 minutes.]

OK, let's start off by saying that this movie has only the thinnest of plots, and the humor is beat-you-on-the-head dumb! But, in spite of that, it actually is a fun little flick. There's no subtlety here, but if you are willing to put your brain into neutral, you will get a kick out of it.

And, I must say, what I appreciated the most about this movie was seeing so many of my favorite British actors in one place: John Cleese (Monty Python), Arthur Lowe (Dad's Army), Joss Ackland (Lethal Weapon 2, They Do It With Mirrors), Denholm Elliott (Indian Jones and the Last Crusade), Nick Tate (Space: 1999), Josephine Tewson (Elizabeth on Keeping Appearances), Burt Kwouk (Cato on the Pink Panther movies) and Connie Booth (Fawlty Towers).

So, if you love British television, and want to see some familiar faces in a goofy, off-beat production, then this movie is for you. If you are looking for a cinematic masterpiece, then look elsewhere, this movie is definitely not for you!

This might have been the end of John Cleese's career.
"The Strange Case of the End of Civilization As We Know It" is the most awful exercise with which any Python has ever been associated. Nothing funny, nothing witty, nothing satirical, no jabs at authority or culture, and no entertainment value. At least "Fawlty Towers" is ugly, nasty, disspiriting, and a celebration of rudeness for the purpose of being cruel -- which is much nicer than anything one could say about "The Strange Case . . . ." The best non-Python Cleese is "Romance with a Double Bass" with the beautiful (and almost naked) Connie Booth.

Don't Buy This Tape . . .
It is awful--I mean it. It is worse than "How To Irritate People" and before I wasted the (money) on this I thought it would be impossible for Cleese to film something worse than "Irritate". You want to see John and Connie in their finest hours together?? Buy the complete set of "Fawlty Towers." It is their finest work. ... Read more

Amazon.com

At first glance, What's Cooking? looks like it was dreamed up by some politically correct screenwriting committee: a series of overlapping stories that intercut among four families (one Hispanic, one Vietnamese, one African American, one Jewish) all preparing for Thanksgiving dinner. But what could be toothless and smarmy is made gripping and genuinely affecting by a mixture of observant writing, fluid direction, and a truly superb ensemble of actors, including Mercedes Ruehl, Alfre Woodard, Joan Chen, Julianna Margulies, Kyra Sedgewick, Dennis Haysbert, and a host of less well known but just as capable others. The script is a marvel of orchestration: small annoyances blossom into fierce conflicts, secrets are deftly revealed, and sanctimoniousness is subtly punctured. The acute but sympathetic portrait of family stress and tension is layered with quiet observations about race and class, as well as the capacity for tolerance and forgiveness. It's recently become a cliché to have characters express themselves through food (examples include Soul Food, Big Night, and Eat Drink Man Woman), but What's Cooking? turns food into a witty exploration of culture as everyone prepares their turkeys in entertainingly different ways--this is not a movie to watch on an empty stomach. Warm without false sentiment, What's Cooking? is deeply enjoyable. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (19)

fun film about four families
This is a fun premise -- spending the Thanksgiving holiday with four very different LA families -- that is executed very well, with capable direction and a fine cast. Children are coming home and families are setting extra places as friends and members of these families -- one Asian, one Hispanic, one Jewish and one African-American -- get together and face various real-life issues such as parent-child disagreements, meeting the SO's parents, in-laws, adultery, etc. The movie could have been riddled with cliches, but a decent script and excellent cast -- including Mercedes Ruehl, Alfre Woodard, Lanie Kazan, Dennis Haysbert and Joan Chen -- make this an entertaining film that is part drama but mostly comedy. Don't watch this while you're dieting, though, as there are many scenes of the wonderful dinners being prepared.

DVD features include subtitles in English, French or Spanish; a commentary track with writer/director Gurinder Chadha (Bend It Like Backham) and co-writer Paul Berges; interview segments with the director on the characters and on Thanksgiving, with Kyra Sedgwick on Julianna Margulies, with Mercedes Ruehl on the film's premise, with Dennis Haysbert on Los Angeles, with Joan Chen on food, and with Alfre Woodard on Chadha; and recipes for Vietnamese spring rolls, tamales, rustic (apple) pie, macaroni & cheese, noodle kugel and oyster-shiitake stuffing.

Definitely a worthwhile rental.

A great ensemble cast makes this a delicious feast...
Directed by Gurinder Chadha, this good ensemble piece centers on four Los Angeles families (in various stages of dysfunction) attempting to come together over Thanksgiving dinner. Though the story lines are familiar, the laughter and emotions keep this movie from being a leftover Turkey sandwich.

The fantastic ensemble cast includes the always wonderful Alfre Woodard as a woman fighting the stress of maintaining peace in her family. Mercedes Ruehl turns in another good performance as a level-headed matriarch rebounding from a cheating husband. Kyra Sedgwick and Julianna Margulies are delicious as a lesbian couple trying not to spar with one set of parents (enably played by Lainie Kazan and Maury Chakin). Joan Chen is also great playing a tradition-based parent losing a battle against her rebelling teenage kids. Toss in Estelle Harris for extra laughs and wonderful turns from much of the supporting cast, and you can't go wrong.

Though the movies' editing is somehwat choppy, it comes together nicely at the end. I'd highly recommend filling your plate with an extra helping of this gem. The enjoyment of laughter, possible tears, and multi-ethnic traditions make this one a winner.

Typical Thanksgiving Day
This movie was great. It shows a typical thanksgiving day in four different households. It goes without saying, there are
problems in every family. If you are expecting A WALTON MOUNTAIN THANKSGIVING or even THANKSGIVING WITH THE CLEAVERS, I'm sorry this is real.

Exquisite and spicy banquet for the soul
Food and its preparation is one of the things that define us, our culture and how we come together with our families.

Writer/Director Gurinder Chadha (who will later write and direct Bend it like Beckham) brings us her first "american" film: an exquisite, sweet and even sexy (while brutally honest) look at contemporary family dynamics in present-day L.A, using food (and surprisingly enough, surfer music) as the thread to sew together the trials and tribulations of four "ethnic" families during a Thanksgiving day.

But "What's cooking" is more than "just" a food movie, or a Thanksgiving movie. Through an amazing ensemble cast (including Academy Award winner Mercedes Ruehl), ingenous cinematography, smart direction and an outstanding script, Director Chadra makes us feel the joys and pains of these characters.

The story itself is simple: follow the lives of four West L.A. families (Latino, Vietnamese, Black and Jewish) through a Thanksgiving Day. But immediately we get drawn into very powerful statements about love, family, community, divorce, diversity, racism, politics, tolerance and violence. We identify with these characters because we can all relate to their problems, and their family interactions.

I highly recommend this film because it is beautifully and skillfully done, and because of the great actor performances, particularly the female leads. Alfre Woodard is exquisite and brutally believable as the wife trying to keep her family together. Joan Chen, Lainie Kazan and of course Mercedes Ruehl all give extraordinary performances as the matriarchs of these families. Julianna Margulies and Kyra Sedgwick are a joy to watch as a lesbian couple. Dennis Haysbert ("24", Far From Heaven) is fabulous also.

For all you Seinfeld fans out there, you get a glimpse of Estelle Harris in yet another Estelle Costanza incarnation. With her, the loveable Ralph Manza as uncle David (Gepetto in "The Cigar Store Indian").

DVD extras include interviews (they're interesting, although not well edited; it feels like they were "thrown together" at the last minute,sometimes even cutting off mid-sentence, but the raw material is there), theatrical trailer, recipes, and a commentary track (with Writer/Director Chadha and co-writer and husband Paul Mayeda Berger). As expected, the commentary track gives us an inside look ad the writing, casting, production, cinematography and the filming process in general.

Expect bigger and greater things from this power couple.

The Melting Pot
Much like her 2003 hit movie "Bend It Like Beckham", Gurinder Chadha's "What's Cooking?" is infused with people who love one another very much, and so even though some tough issues are thrown their way, we know that, because of that love, they will get through life's obstacles ok.

"What's Cooking" centers around four families living on the same block in Los Angeles. They don't know each other, however, and instead, like most modern families, are focused on their own problems and worries. Chadha makes good use of "the American melting pot" idea, as one family is Italian, one is hispanic, one is black, and one is Asian. One of the most wonderful aspects of the movie is that, even though the people are of different ethnicities, they are portrayed respectfully as human beings. We can relate to each of them. They are different, but the same. Isn't that the underlying truth of us all? People are, indeed, people.

There are some nice performances here: Alfre Woodard is great as a stressed, neglected wife. Dennis Haysbert is quiet, cool and simmering as her husband. Mercedes Ruehl shines as the mother of the hispanic family, trying to move on with her life from an ex-husband that just won't understand that it's over between them. Kyra Sedgwick and Julianna Margulies are endearing as a lesbian couple on their first trip to meet the parents. Estelle Harris (of "Seinfeld" fame) is deliciously wicked as the aunt who just keeps pushing the issue. And, of course, there's Lainie Kazan -- always a treat.

I saw this film at Roger Ebert's Overlooked Film Festival in 2003, and it was very well-received. There are dramatic, serious moments, and then there are quite hilarious moments. The theater was filled with laughter a number of times, and deservedly so. In the end, this is a 'feel-good' film. And one which will also have you salivating throughout, as each family is busy cooking and preparing their Thanksgiving dinners.

This is the second Gurinder Chadha movie that I have seen, and from what I have tell, she seems to really believe the best of people. Yes, we fight. Yes, we quarrel. Yes, we disagree. But at the heart of humanity has to be love and understanding, if we are to get along and survive. "What's Cooking" embodies this sentiment wonderfully. It was a joy to watch. ... Read more

Reviews (44)

A Strange Sort of Peace
In today's world of multi-million-dollar-budget films it's easy to develop high expectations. We're accustomed now to realities whose sights and sounds have been tweaked by talent and technology to perfection--we now see exactly what the director hoped we would, rather than settling for less-impressive, but more-thoughtful, innuendos and visual metaphors.

So in some ways it's refreshing to partake of a lower-budget production like Bent. The world of staged theatre is a simpler, more intellectual one than that of cinema, and too often an exquisitely crafted stage play is "technologized" beyond recognition when it is shot for the screen. But, no doubt because playwright Martin Sherman himself adapted the screenplay, Bent still feels as nakedly thoughtful as the best small-cast stage dramas.

The story centers on the relationship between Max, a gay jew in Hitler's Germany, and Horst, whose character is introduced in such a way that we're half-surprised to realize later in the film that he's the same person we met on the train. But that is the beauty of the playwright's craft: in art, as in life, people we meet as "passing strangers" can come to touch us profoundly.

The sets Mathias chooses as backdrops for the story are far from accurate historically, but they are perfectly chosen to support the mood of the film--Max and Horst, like the star-crossed lovers in a Shakespeare tragedy, are lonely pawns to forces much larger than they. Indeed, Bent offers the most tragically romantic scenes of any film I've seen. Two lovers, brought together by the same forces that keep them forever apart, survive on fantasy and suggestion in a world where life, in so many ways, has no meaning.

Bent is not a "feel-good" movie. But again, the art of Bent allows us to find peace in the lives and love of two strangers who met on a train.

Evocative of a stage play, important material
The movie has been set to feel a bit more like a stage play than a film, but it works nonetheless. It covers the story of two gay men who meet in a Nazi death camp and a very inspiring if ultimately tragic love story. Gays and lesbians are the often-forgotten victims of the Holocaust, and this movie and the play it is based on are important, also, because of its contribution to Holocaust studies in general. Mick Jager's unusual appearance as a drag queen is also interesting. As a source of education, there is some sexual content that makes the film inappropriate for use in high school classrooms without a bit of editing, but I think unedited material is very well suited to a college classroom--and is essential viewing for anyone interested in the Holocaust. An important piece of GLBT heritage.

For dedicated homophiles with strong stomachs only
This is the story of the concentration camp inmates forced to wear the pink triangle, symbol of their homosexuality.

This film was formerly a successful play and perhaps it succeeded because of its shocking topic, but this director is no Steven Spielberg. Never did I feel one bit of realism or sympathy for the characters although the brutality was unceasing and the story intense. For example, a boxcar scene which might have worked in a play was just too stagy, and the camera lingered much too lovingly over attractive semi-nude male bodies. We've found out by then, of course, that the title, Bent, refers to the shape of the lead character's male organ although there were no camera shots of this. The dialog seemed contrived, the prisoners all looked too healthy and fit, and, while this film might be applauded for handling, at last, a forbidden topic, it just didn't work as a film. Even Mick Jagger, miscast in the role of a drag queen who runs a nightclub in Berlin, just couldn't save it.

I love this movie
I was really happy with the positive reviews that Bent has been getting here, I love the film and am always disapointed when a reviewer blows it off. This movie literally made me sob (my emotions are easily manipulated)both times I watched it. I've heard a lot of pissing and moaning about the "sex" scene but I thought it was really beautiful, wonderfully acted and very moving. I completely love this movie and can honestly say I wouldn't change one thing about it. Oh, and the reviewer who reviewed right before me is a very scary neo nazi. Someone should let him know that homophobia is never attractive and I would not be shocked to learn that he was a slightly impared and amply pimpled teenager. With no friends.

The most impacting GLBT film I have ever seen...
I have seldom seen a film which stuck me on such an emotional level. It is rare for a film to have a lasting impact on me, but I left the theatre changed after watching "Bent". It is right up there with "Requiem for a Dream" as movies that can be labled psychological brutality, albiet very worthwhile psychological brutality. A truely superb film. ... Read more