Reviews (596)

A marvelous adaptation of one of the great novels.
This A&E/BBC miniseries is a true masterpiece, bringing Jane Austen's most popular novel to life in a near perfect production. It has everything: authentic Regency Period atmosphere, costumes, settings, a beautiful musical score, excellent performances by a well-chosen cast. Andrew Davis's script does full justice to Austen's original. Colin Firth is excellent as Mr. Darcy, but Jennifer Ehle just takes my breath away with her magnificent performance, which catches every nuance of Elizabeth Bennet's character exactly right in every scene. It is a pleasure to watch all 4 1/2 hours straight through again and again. As a longtime devoted admirer of Jane Austen's works, I am very critical of any movies based upon her novels, but this has to be one of the very best adaptations of any major literary work.

WORTH OWNING AND REPEAT VIEWING
I'm usually very hesitant about adaptations from book to film (especially classics), but this movie does justice to Jane Austin's timeless masterpiece. I rented this movie on a whim, thinking that it would at least be somewhat entertaining, but to my surprize and great pleasure, it not only captivated the true essence of the novel but the characters really came alive and stayed true to the story the whole way through. I eventually bought the DVD and I have NOT had "buyer's remorse" ever since. I get caught up in every moment of every scene of every viewing.

There are no annoying "Hollywood stars" in it like in Ang Lee's Sense and Sensibility, yet the acting is incredible. Although I enjoyed Sense and Sensibility (on the second viewing because the first time I watched it I fell asleep), it doesn't hold a candle to Pride and Prejudice. This adaption lets your imagination steep in the imagery, language, and essence of the film so you never get "pulled out" of a scence. If you're unsure as whether or not to buy this gem, just do what I did and rent it for the weekend. You'll soon discover that your movie collection will be lacking without this rendition of Pride and Prejudice.

Superb, true to Jane Austen adaption
This version of Pride & Predjudice is my absolute favorite. I have owned the tapes and the original DVD. As far as the movie itself goes, the characters are all perfectly cast. From the embarassingly annoying Mrs. Bennet, the sweet oldest sister Jane, the condescending and IQ challenged Mr. Collins, to the feisty Elizabeth and the Proud Mr. Darcy, you will find yourself engrossed in every character's story. The script was written to stay true to the original novel. The scenery in breathtaking, and you will find yourself paying as much attention to the beautiful countryside as you will the drama.
As for technical details, the biographies that are included on this special version are simply printed words on the screen. Interesting information, but each bio is only one or two paragraphs long with a complete list of credits for only a few of the characters. The mini featurette is okay.
My bottom line: if you love romance, drama, and history then this is the movie for you. If you already own it on tape or have the original dvd, save your money and enjoy the version you have.

Period Movie - Lovely to watch
As an avid lover of period movies, I received this particular one last Christmas. I've been able to watch it multiple times. I love Colin Firth's portrayal of a proud and prejudice man who finally learns there are more important things. It's funny and romantic and the dialogue, as with any period piece, will keep you on your toes . . . maybe that's why I can re-watch so many times. It is a timeless movie!

Colin Firth...need I say more? Great Movie Colin Firth aside
This movie is so amazing I've watched it so many times and I never get tired of it. I thought this was by far the best film adaptation of the novel. Colin Firth portrayed Mr. Darcy exactly as I pictured him in my mind. I loved all the characters and felt like the actors/actresses lived up the their characters in the novel. While the picture quality may not be that great (read several comments about it) it didnt bother me one bit. The locations they filmed were simply beautiful, the story and characters entralling, and the costumes and scenes eye catching....I didnt even notice the quality. ... Read more

Amazon.com

No one uses color like Chinese director Zhang Yimou--movies like Raise the Red Lantern or Hero, though different in tone and subject matter, are drenched in rich, luscious shades of red, blue, yellow, and green. House of Flying Daggers is no exception; if they weren't choreographed with such vigorous imagination, the spectacular action sequences would seem little more than an excuse for vivid hues rippling across the screen. Government officers Leo and Jin (Asian superstars Andy Lau and Takeshi Kaneshiro) set out to destroy an underground rebellion called the House of Flying Daggers (named for their weapon of choice, a curved blade that swoops through the air like a boomerang). Their only chance to find the rebels is a blind women named Mei (Ziyi Zhang, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon) who has some lethal kung fu moves of her own. In the guise of an aspiring rebel, Jin escorts Mei through gorgeous forests and fields that become bloody battlegrounds as soldiers try to kill them both. While arrows and spears of bamboo fly through the air, Mei, Jin, and Leo turn against each other in surprising ways, driven by passion and honor. Zhang's previous action/art film, Hero, sometimes sacrificed momentum for sheer visual beauty; House of Flying Daggers finds a more muscular balance of aesthetic splendor and dazzling swordplay. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (153)

DO NOT buy this crap!
OK! Who the hell gave this movie 4 stars??!! Poor story, poor dialog, poor EVERYTHING!!! This movie sucked. Get stabbed by a dagger and the girl stays alive until the unnecessary long fight between two bad actors is over??!! Come on! This movie is worse than the Hindi crap that comes out of Bollywood. Wish I could give it zero stars, but I can't. Amazon, will you please see that movies of this low quality get zero stars?

Technically breathtaking, but left this viewer a little cold
Zhang Yimou's HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS continues where the director's HERO left off: it is a film of immense visual beauty and amazing choreography, supporting a plot with melodramatic elements to it. But whereas HERO could conceivably, amidst the dazzling imagistic pageantry and big emotions, be interpreted as a political statement (the film ends with a ruler having to sacrifice a hero for what he considers the greater cause of unifying feudal China), HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS is content to be romantic melodrama, plain and simple.

Personally, I kinda prefer the extra intellectual and thematic stimulation offered by HERO. At the end of that film, you really had something to think about; at the end of HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS...well, the story is over (and a song sung in English by soprano Kathleen Battle plays over the closing credits). Nothing of great consequence, I felt, had really happened in this film; it is basically one ravishing image and one amazing fight sequence following another, interspersed with (admittedly well-acted) moments of intimacy or high drama. If Zhang Yimou was aiming for thematic subtlety in HERO, here he goes for operatic emotions and visual spectacle. And for all its technical brilliance, the whole thing ultimately left me a little cold---maybe a bit too melodramatic and soapy for my taste.

That is a very personal reaction, of course. The technical brilliance Zhang Yimou brings to HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS is not to be denied; these are some of the most breathtaking (and breathtakingly filmed) fight sequences seen since the last notable "wuxia" film, Ang Lee's CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON. And the actors bring as much conviction as possible to their basically two-dimensional characters: certainly, as House of Flying Daggers member Mei, Ziyi Zhang brings convincing passion to her role, as do Takeshi Kaneshiro and Andy Lau as, respectively Jin and Leo, two police deputies who rescue Mei from prison and try to trick her into bringing them to the House of Flying Daggers to stop their rebelliousness once and for all.

Perhaps the best way to appreciate HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS is to look at it as a cinematic opera. Zhang Yimou is clearly not afraid to work on a big canvas, and he brings all the big emotions and spectacular sights he can to tell his melodramatic story. Those who go into this film expecting to be dazzled will most likely be satisfied; it is a genuine technical marvel. For me, though, I was expecting more substance to the film than it delivered. HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS may be more purely enjoyable than HERO, but the latter, to me, is a much more interesting movie than this one.

Super Cool Movie!!!
The action and special effects sequences in this movie are incredibly fun to watch.Zhang Ziyi is flawless as usual, and her perfomance and beauty justifies buying this DVD in itself.

Great cinematography, weak story
Genre: Foreign, Martial Arts, Romance

Genre Grade: B+

Final Grade: A-

This was another great film from Chinese director Yimou Zhang. Although not even close to comparing to his last film, Hero, it still was a great movie. Zhang is an artist, it is as simple as that. His locations are perfect, the colors are vibrant, and the characters are passionate. This is much more a love story than anything. It offers some good surprises concerning the characters and keeps the mystery of the "House of Flying Daggers" a secret to even the viewers. Actress Ziyi Zhang should learn to speak English because she could be a huge star in the United States.

I recommend this film to anyone who enjoyed Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon or Hero. It is dubbed in English so you don't have to read subtitles if you don't want to.

stunning
Yimou is a true artist of cinema. Hero and House of Flying Daggers are beautiful and spiritual adventures in Asian cinema. Both films are remarkable acheivments that are lost on the reviewer who gave this film one star. True art is often missunderstood by the masses. ... Read more

Amazon.com

One of the best films of 2004, Kinsey pays tribute to the flawed but honorable man who revolutionized our understanding of human sexuality. As played by Liam Neeson in writer-director Bill Condon's excellent film biography, Indiana University researcher Alfred Kinsey was so consumed by statistical measurements of human sexual activity that he almost completely overlooked the substantial role of emotions and their effect on human behavior. This made him an ideal researcher and science celebrity who revealed that sexual behaviors previously considered deviant and even harmful (homosexuality, oral sex, etc.) are in fact common and essentially normal in the realm of human experience, but whose obsession with scientific method frequently placed him at odds with his understanding wife (superbly played by Laura Linney) and research assistants. In presenting Kinsey as a driven social misfit, Condon's film gives Neeson one of his finest roles while revealing the depth of Kinsey's own humanity, and the incalculable benefit his research had on our collective sexual enlightenment. With humor, charm, and intelligence, Kinsey shines a light where darkness once prevailed. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Pretentious Attempt
In retrospection, Kinsey is over-rated. It rides on the 21st century's fetish of sexuality and pretends to be another "Beautiful Mind" but fails and flops. It is one of those pretentious artistic attempt.

Truth or Perversity?
This became more and more difficult to watch as the movie went along.A selected biography in the style of Ray or Delovely, but quite a different choice of subject matter.

Kinsey's father set the tone of Kinsey's own life, with a certainty that becomes obnoxious.The certainty that he knows what the answer is, in this case to the issues of human sexuality and its associated ignorance and taboos, and as with all people who think they know, there is a fall.At the time that Kinsey was achieving his fame there were restrictions on the entire subject of sex practices and sex mores.It stands to reason that the only people who were working in this area were strange themselves, or at least unconventional.That's where I had difficulty.Were Kinsey and his associates really as perverse as they appeared in the movie?Or were their banter and actions exaggerated for the sake of a good story.

I found no sympathy for Kinsey nor for anyone else in the movie.And some of the conclusions that they reached seem so counter-intuitive that they defy belief.I didn't know whether they were trying to find truth or to present perversity.

Potent Film with Certain Foundation for Heated Debate...
Galileo Galilei and scientists alike announced through in-depth research that the Earth was not flat and faced heavy persecution.Their different thinking broke the standards of the 16th century pious beliefs, which had been used a long time before scientists questioned the validity and reliability in what they observed.This offended the Catholic Church who proclaimed that they held the highest truth, a truth deeply rooted in unquestioned morality.The questioning of the religious beliefs triggered a witch-hunt of the scientists that disagreed with the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.However, the truth eventually emerged, as Galileo's theories are still the instruments of current astronomical research that continues to evolve the human existence beyond the earth.

The Catholic Church and Lutheran Church persecuted people with different ideas of Christianity.Those who desired to exercise their own freedom of religion sought refuge in America where they could exercise their freedom to express their own ideas of religion.After the War of Independence, the founding fathers formed the Congress that drafted the 10 amendments.The first amendment brings the people freedom of speech, which includes religion.However, the very same ideas that sought freedom in America later turned from being the persecuted to the persecutor, as these notions harassed new different thinkers.The notion of cyclical history comes to mind when scientists like Alfred Kinsey are being silenced based on morality and unfounded facts.

Kinsey (Liam Neeson), a biologist, was brought up under strict puritan rules, as his father consistently proclaimed being the ultimate source of knowledge.In a sense he grew up with similar persecuting standards as Galileo, but instead of conforming to the rules he broke the bond with his father when he accepted a partial scholarship to Bowdoin to study biology.Kinsey's father wanted him to become an engineer, which has a certain level of irony to it, as his father believed that all modern inventions at the beginning of the 20th century were evil.The pursuit of the biology degree brought him through Harvard to Indiana University where he took a position as an assistant professor while studying stag beetles and later the American Cynipidae also known as the gall wasp.

Years of research and collecting the American Cynipidae allowed Kinsey to meticulously catalogue his gall wasp library.During this time Kinsey met his wife Clara (Laura Linney) with whom he had three children.However, before having the children they had difficulties in the bedroom, as Clara assumed it was because they physically would not fit together.This was an unacceptable answer for Kinsey who approached the problem, as if there were an answer, which there was.It simply was painful for Clara to have sex as her hymen was too thick, and with a quick procedure by a doctor she had this fixed.Consequently, Kinsey continued to help other couples with problems of sexual nature, but realized that he did not have any real answers to the questions that were posed to him.

In the 1940s, Kinsey got his chance to do teach a marriage course in regards to sex and the social aspects of sex between husbands and wives.As the class went on his interest deepened through the vast number of questions people asked in regards to sex.This concluded in Kinsey beginning to research the taboo ridden topic, which so many have been taught to avoid at all costs except for the purpose of having children.Kinsey opposed the abstinence with his statement, "society has interfered with what should be a normal biological development..."

The sex research forced Kinsey to travel uncharted waters, as he had to find a way to collect data that were valid and reliable.Through this process he design an interview style that had to be nonjudgmental in order for the interviewee to reveal everything without having to feel any negative feelings.This process gave them surprising facts about sex, as they also encountered homosexuality, extramarital affairs, and premarital affairs.They also found evidence of deviant sexual practices, which most of the society rightfully did not tolerate such as pedophilia.An important note to this is that Kinsey was only collecting data, he did not advocate harmful sexual practices.However, in the eyes of the society Kinsey was in the end drawn into the mud, as much of his intentions was misunderstood.

Nonetheless, Kinsey helped breaking the ice of the forbidden issue that in the end opened up the society to understanding this hushed, but normal behavior.If Kinsey did not push the envelope the society might have continued its intolerance towards sexual issues, an intolerance that would force many to hide their true identity in the fear of repercussions and prejudice based on hatred and fear.For example, John Edgar Hoover created a profiling center for homosexuals and other undesirables.The very same intolerance would function as a shield that would have protected many of the Catholic priests that have been uncovered to molest children.It is thanks to Kinsey and researchers alike that it has become acceptable to discuss this taboo topic in media, where horrendous crimes such as child molesting can be caught.Yet, there are still many who believe that Kinsey was wrong to do what he did, and they are naturally free to have their own opinions.As they should let the truth be unveiled from darkness and not let erotophobia, i.e., learned negative emotional response to information of sexual nature, affect any decision-making that could help human beings discover a better future.

Kinsey is a political and potent film that will undoubtedly make many feel awkward and uncomfortable.Yet, it is also an important film, as it displays the importance of learning the truth and not hiding behind groundless rules and laws based on fictionalized morality.The film also has historical value to our contemporary society where many laws often are passed based on morality, which ends up hurting a fraction of the society and slows the progress of humanity.When this happens, history seems to be have drifted into oblivion as prejudice and intolerance continues to haunt the society.Hopefully, the film Kinsey offers an opportunity for debate and insightfulness, and not continued narrow-mindedness.

On balance, a positive contribution to human understanding
Alfred Kinsey did a great service to the study of sex.Yes, some of his methodologies were suspect, "self-selection" throwing a monkey-wrench in the whole randomization requirement.His subjects were perhaps not the most representative sampling of the population.Furthermore, he and his staff became too personally involved in the work.His assistants comprised a sort of swinger's club.Kinsey could be faulted for not having anticipated the conflicts brought about by such activities among colleagues.

Unfortunately, these aspects of his life and the film will obscure - for many - the more significant meaning of his work: Bringing the discussion of sex out of the dark corners of human consciousness and into the light.Also, by removing the shame factor from sex, a natural healthy aspect of the human animal, Kinsey legitimized the scientific study of sex.

As far as the film per se, I was impressed with the honesty of the piece.Contrary to what some reviewers have said, this film does not make Kinsey a hero.It rightly credits him for his work, yet reveals a conflicted, troubled psyche at the same time as Kinsey tries to navigate the line between his objective scientific observation and his subjective sexual experiences.This blurring is where Kinsey erred.

Interesting insight into groundbreaking study
Alfred Kinsey was a pioneer in the study of human sexuality. He was a professor at Indiana University and spent the first 20 years of his career studying an insect, the "gall wasp." This movie, starring Liam Neeson in the title role, depicts Dr. Kinsey as having an obsession with his study of the gall wasp, collecting hundreds of thousands of specimens and devoting his life to studying this species. Tapped to teach a course on marriage and the family, Kinsey developed an interest in human sexuality and he bacame as obsessive in this study as he was in his earlier endeavor. He was driven and pushed his staff hard. He employed interviewers who spoke with thousands of people in taking sexual histories. Kinsey was very hands on as he personally instructed his staff on how to put subjects at ease as they conducted the interviews.

Dr. Kinsey was the son of a morally strict father, convincingly played by John Lithgow. Neeson's depecition of Dr. Kinsey shows the results of this upbringing. His characterization of Kinsey comes across as very stiff and uptight. He is not one to really let his hair down yet, in his groundbreaking study, there is no taboo that he is unwilling to explore. Indeed, he explores his own sexuality as he has an extramarital gay affair. Despite serious misgivings at first, his wife, played by Laura Linney, is accepting.

The studies were very controversial, having been done in the 1940s, long before the "sexual revolution." Some people found his findings to be very liberating in that they discovered that they were not alone in their sexual feelings. Other people were shocked, believing that the subject was taboo and should not be discussed. There is one brief scene in which a woman, who agonized over her lesbian inclinations, was liberated by Dr. Kinsey's findings and, thereby allowed herself to enter into a relationship. Others, including Kinsey's father, were scandalized. Ultimately, however, Kinsey's father allows himself to be interviewed by his son and reveals his own, painful secrets of a repressed childhood.

We live in a more sexually open era than we did, generations ago. This movie gives an insight into one of the reasons this is so. I recommend this dvd. ... Read more

Reviews (105)

A Wonderful, magical movie about the power of love.
I recently saw "The Notebook" and am so glad I did. This is my new favorite movie. I've never seen another like it. It's a wonderful adaptation of the book by Nicholas Sparks. It's cinematography is beautiful as well as the script and the acting is unforgettable. Ryan Gossling and Rachel McAddams are wonderful in this and give tour de force performances as the young lovers. They have a great chemistry together that electrifies the screen. Let us not forget James Garner and Gena Rowlands they are wonderfully cast as the older lovers. Sam Sherpard and Joan Allen also turn in wonderful performances in their roles. I cannot recommend this movie enough. It is moving and poignant, there wasn't a dry eye in the theatre when the movie ended. I think it is rare to see a movie that can be that affecting. GO SEE THIS MOVIE!!!!!!! You will not regret it in fact you'll probably want to see it again.

Sweet, Sappy, Romantic, Beautiful
I got to see the sneak preview of this movie this past Saturday (6/12/04) and I absolutely loved it. I've seen Ryan Gosling on television before (Breaker High), but I hadn't seen Rachel McAdams until now. Their characters were so real and so believable. Even though the end may be predictable, this film lacks the typical structure of most romantic movies I've seen. It was interesting to see how the characters evolved and came together.

The film begins with James Garner reading pages out of a notebook to alzheimer(?) patient Gena Rowlands. As the story unfolds, we meet Allie and Noah. Allie comes from a wealthy Southern family. Noah works in the lumber yard. We see their joys as well as their struggles. Though they seem like complete opposites, they fall in love only to be torn apart when Noah leaves for World War 2 and Allie becomes engaged to another man.

I won't spoil the ending, but the two lovers reunite and Allie is faced with the decision of whether to keep her promise to her fiance or to go back to the man she left behind.

my fav. movie of all time
I loved the movie The Notebook. After I saw it for the first time I immediately felt the need to see it again, I ended up going to see it 5 more times that week even though the prices were so high. I havent seen a movie this good in a long time. I laughed, I cryed, and so much more. I felt as if I was experiancing the same things I wanted to be Ali, I wanted to be there. I even fell in love with the cast every 1 that played the roles were perfect. It was just a great movie.

Excellent!!!!
I thought this movie was exellent! I rate it five stars because I don't cry much in films and this was a tissue grabbing type of movie! It had three generations of girls in my family crying all at one time!

Rachel McAdams and Ryan Gosling were fabulous together I thought. They had great chemistry on screen. I love the true fairytale type romance and this was def. a movie that made people wish they were the lead role! I also enjoyed the hints of humor in the movie, even if it was a serious part they made it enjoyable! I think this is a def. buyer! To anyone out there who hasn't seen it, go, you won't be dissapointed! Also, check out Nicholas Spark's books. Nicholas Sparks also wrote the book A Walk to Remember which is now a film as well with Mandy Moore as the lead actress.

The actors were incredible
The plot was mediocre, I won't lie about that, but the one ingredient that saved this movie from being just a disastrous chick-flic was the acting. Rachael McAdams, Gena Rowlands, and James Garner were moving and the movie was remarkably poignant. Ryan Gosling was convincing, to say the least, but I prefer to see him in more intense roles, like The Believer.

If romances are your type of movies, go for it. Chances are you will enjoy it. Bring tissues if you're a crier. Actually, bring them even if you aren't. I've been described as "unsensitive" and I cried for the last 30 minutes. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Four extremely beautiful people do extremely horrible things to one another in Closer, Mike Nichols' pungent adaptation of Patrick Marber's play that easily marks the Oscar-winning director's best work in years. Anna (Julia Roberts) is a photographer who specializes in portraits of strangers; Dan (Jude Law) is an obituary writer struggling to become a novelist; Alice (Natalie Portman) is an American stripper freshly arrived in London after a bad relationship; and Larry (Clive Owen) is a dermatologist who finds love under the most unlikely of circumstances. When their paths cross it's a dizzying supernova of emotions, as Nichols and Marber adroitly construct various scenes out of their lives that pair them again and again in various permutations of passion, heartbreak, anger, sadness, vengeance, pleading, deception, and most importantly, brutal honesty. It's only until you're more than halfway through the movie that you'll have to ask yourself exactly why you are watching such a beautifully tragic tale, as Closer is basically the ickiest, grossest, most dysfunctional parts of all your past relationships strung together into one movie. Ultimately, it falls to the four actors to draw you deeper into the story; all succeed relatively, but it's Law and Owen whose characters will cut you to the quick. Law proves that yet again he's most adept at playing charming, amoral bastards with manipulative streaks, and Owen is nothing short of brilliant as the character most turned on by the energy inherent in destructive relationships--whether he's on the giving or receiving end. --Mark Englehart ... Read more

Reviews (259)

4 great actors, 4 great stars
This is the story of four people: two men and two women. It souds plain simple, but the story is not so. It is not the typical story of a love quadrangle. It's a story of power, pride, self-confidence and, of course, love.

The greatest and the lowest of human condition. All for love, but all for gaining the higher respect and best appearance in front of the rest of the world.

The story is fantastic but, what to say of the actors? It is not only Portmann to take care. I think Julia Roberts makes her best acting ever. Jude Law is plain correct but Clive Owen is the great discovery for me. It is clear that this is "a film for actors", to show the best of them and they really succeed.

The only problem is that these two facts (story and acting) hide a poor direction and some minor aspects. Personally, I think the producer did the budget and realized he has nothing to spend in such details.

But it is a very recommendable movie to spend the afternoon at home. I saw it in the cinema and I had such a great impression that I hired it to see it again (and I haven't done it in more than ten times).

Shockingly Disappointing
I don't understand how anyone could enjoy this film.It was by far the worst movie I've seen this year.In fact, it was so bad that I doubt I'll be able to enjoy watching the main 4 actors ever again.

Although some people feel that watching 4 people destroy each other is beautiful, I find it to be depressing.This movie is about 4 "lovers" who use each other uncaringly, cry a lot, use the "f" word multiple times in every sentence, and who are completely unlikeable.It's like the director thought that having 4 beautiful people in a film was enough.I love a good drama, but this wasn't even close.

The plot is as shallow as the characters.The ending is very silly; we find out information that the film makers thought would create a "Usual Suspects" type of ending, but it all falls flat and seems contrived.Amazon has many better DVDs for sale than this garbage.

Mike Nichols at his best...
Genre: Dark Romance

Genre Grade: A+

Final Grade: A

This was a great movie - except it's possibly one of the most verbally sexual movies I've ever seen - but I can handle a little sex talk! There were about, I dunno, eight people or so who walked out of the movie because of the offensive language and sex talk. This movie breaks many barriers and talks about problems in relationships and tries to take a closer look at the raw emotions of affairs. The acting was Oscar-worthy from each person, Clive Owen coming out on top in my opinion. Natalie Portman was amazing as well, and Julia Roberts actually gives the audience something new.

This movie is extremely depressing, and is not a date movie unless you want to walk away feeling hopeless. It leaves us with a despairing look at humanity and our own desires, and the film brings to light things that are normally left in the bedroom or simply remain unspoken. Definitely worth seeing just for the performances (especially the amazing encounter between Julia Roberts and Clive Owen, and then later the discussion between Jude Law and Clive Owen), the AMAZING dialogue, and just because of the fact that Mike Nichols directed it.

Great Performances save this film!
This movie is hard to follow.No question about that.Most movies that are adapted from Broadway plays don't fair well on screen unless they're made from the classic playwrights (Tennessee Williams, David Mamet, Eugene O'Neill, etc.).Many of the negative reviews here on Amazon.com expecting more action are justified.However, I found the movie to be better than expected.Mike Nichols is one of Hollywood's finest directors.And with four of the best actors around, he does very will with the challenging subject matter.Natalie Portman has become the "Harrison Ford" of the Star Wars genre by breaking out into a great Oscar nominated role.British TV star Clive Owen also breaks free of his shell with his excellent performance.Juila Roberts & Jude Law round out this excellent cast.If you can stay with it for the performances, you'll be amused.

One of the worst movies I've ever seen
I was really excited about seeing this, since it got such good reviews. Boy, was I surprised. This movie is so depressing, with everyone cheating on each other and getting hurt. There was a review that said that this is a real love story, but if that's true we all might as well throw in the towel. If you like feeling like you want to slit your wrists, then watch the movie. If not, definitely look elsewhere. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Grande Ecole merges the delirious ogling of naked flesh withhighfalutin' cultural theory from abstruse thinkers like MichelFoucoult--a whiplash-inducing combination that could only come from theFrench. Paul (Gergori Baquet), a middle-class student, arrives at a snootyeconomics school and finds himself lusting after his new roommate, theupper-class Louis-Arnault (Jocelyn Quivrin)--even though Paul already hasa hot-and-heavy relationship with his luscious girlfriend Agnes (AliceTaglioni). Paul's sexual confusion leads him into an affair with ahandsome Arab groundskeeper named Mecir (Salim Kechiouche), who fallshelplessly in love with Paul. Grande Ecole awkwardly combines raceand class consciousness, the defense of a death-row inmate in Texas, andan extensive shower scene with the school's water polo team--but whatfinally gives it heart is Mecir, whose love for Paul seems doomed totragedy. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Amazon.com

Writer/director Pedro Almodóvar's dark, sexy Hitchcock homage is his best work since his Oscar-winning All About My Mother, and deepened by a sun-dappled sadness. Handsome, enigmatic Ángel (Gael García Bernal) arrives at the Spanish movie offices of director Enrique Goded (Fele Martinez) and happily proclaims that he's actually Enrique's long-lost school chum Ignacio--an announcement that is both less than convincing and more than it seems. A novice actor, Ángel pitches a semi-autobiographical screenplay in which he's determined to star, a revenge-laden reflection of the doomed love he and Enrique shared as boys before a pedophile priest cruelly intervened. The script, and the lost days it recalls, carefully unfurls into a series of brooding movies-within-movies and memories-inside-memories, which allow the sensual, multiple-role-playing Bernal to give the performance of his young career--among other things, he makes a stunningly convincing drag queen--and Almodóvar the opportunity to movingly suggest that people will pay any price to ensure that their stories are told. --Steve Wiecking ... Read more

Reviews (37)

'¡Eh!' '¡Despierta!'
This film is incredible. I'm relatively fluent in Spanish and had to make do without subtitles which always tend to detract from the full experience of a film. It took me a couple a viewings to fully understand everything that was said but when I finally twigged, the hairs on the back of my neck stood up.
We start off with Enrique, an up and coming movie producer. He's on the look out for a good story and one comes walking right through his door. Turns out his old school friend, Ignacio, who now wants to be known adamantly as Angel, has the perfect solution. He's written a screen play depicting certain points of their lives with added fiction, naturally, and hopes Enrique will consider producing it, with him staring as the principle character Zahra, a transvestite. Sound unusual? We haven't even scratched the surface. When Ignacio and Enrique were boys, they attended a strict catholic boarding school. The two of them were in love, much to the distress of El Padre Manolo, who wanted Ignacio all to himself. One poignant scene is during a field trip. We see the school boys frolicking happily in a lake while hearing a beautiful coir boy rendition of `Moon River'. All of a sudden the song is cut short with Ignacio running out from behind a bush with El Padre in pursuit. Ignacio falls, a rock cutting his forehead. As the blood slides down the centre of his face, we here him remark `I knew that ever since that moment, my life would for ever be divided in two'. After a little mis-hap in the boys bathroom after lights out, El padre Manolo expels Enrique and continues his advances on Ignacio, which is left to the viewers' imagination. The years go by, and they never meet again, until now, back to the present day. Enrique is delighted to have been reunited with his lost love but Ignacio or `Angel' is behaving rather strangely. Not remembering their favourite song from their school days and indeed turning a rather horny Enrique down in a risqué pool sequence (¡calienta poyas!), something's definitely not right. Angel leaves in a huff and forgets his lighter which conveniently has his hometown address on the side. Enrique journeys to Valencia only to find that *his* Ignacio died 4 years ago and his brother Juan, Stage name Angel, took it quite hard. Part devastated part intrigued, Enrique decides to play along, giving Angel the part and taking him as a lover, all in the desire to find out what makes Juan tick, he's an impenetrable mystery. The story, aptly named `La Visita' has its ending rewritten and as the final dramatic shoot comes to an end Enrique is still at a loss, that is, until he receives a visit of his own!
I'll leave the rest to you; this movie has many intricate threads woven in. A story within a story as they say. The actors are spectacular and Gael García Bernal manages to come off as childish, sensual, innocent, conniving and in the end quite chilling, he also makes a stunning drag queen. I recommend this move to anyone that likes a good mystery. I'm on the hunt for the soundtrack. ¡Cómpralo ya!

Intense & Provocative but not how you'd think
This exceptional film is entirely unique in its intensity and depth, but not how I expected. The priestly molestation is rather matter-of-fact, and not dramatized to the extreme as so many movies have done of late. The sex & nudity is very carefully placed, not at all gratuitous (unfortunately-more would have been welcomed albeit unnecessary for the story). In fact I can not tell why this version is NC-17, have Americans really become That Victorian?
Much has been written about the story, what I didn't know prior to viewing was the intensity of plot twists and turns. I won't spoil any secrets here, but suffice it to say that it isn't even the secrets that are so intense, it is the masterful way in which things are revealed. This is really a film about sex as power, and all of the power plays which don't make anyone happy.
Almodovar's direction and cinematography are stunning, erotic, and intensley emotional. He tells so much of the story visually without dialogue. What a treat.
The film ends on a realistic note. There are no firey car crashes, no earth-shattering explosions, no full-frontal nudity, none of the usual supects, but this film sneaks up on you, shakes you to your being, and as you are drawn in by the sensuality and drama, the film demonstrates that life isn't fair, kind, or even very pretty sometimes.

all stars
After watching many of Almodovar's films in a Spanish cinema class at UNC-Chapel Hill, I must say this one is the most accessible so far.Gael Garcia Bernal does one of the best acting jobs I've ever seen in a film- ever.If you can stomach the subject matter it's worth watching.

Almodovar's attention to detail is amazing, just watch Sr. Serrano cut stories out of the newspaper and you'll see what I mean... Amazing.And Almodovar messes with your mind by the way he does the casting.. don't want to spoil it for anyone, just see for yourself.

Almodóvar Illustrates the Aftermath of Bad Education...
To see is to believe, some say, yet what one sees in Bad Education should not be trusted, as everything has a sinister characteristic.All of the characters are ominously sleazy, even the protagonist of the film offers an element of darkness around him, which seems to stem from a criminal background.This dark theme suggests that the story offers a film noir experience.However, even the concept of film noir does not give this film justice, as it goes beyond the known borders of this genre while venturing into a new territory.Pedro Almodóvar creates a refreshing cinematic experience that takes sudden turns when least expected while traveling into a dubious world.Many of Almodóvar's previous films offer laughter and contemplation, yet most of them deal with a dubious theme, as does Bad Education. His personal insignia with colorful photography still leaves traces throughout the film, even though it is slightly subdued.

Enrique Goded (Fele Martínez), who some might have seen in the bloodcurdling Thesis (1996), or in the mesmerizing Open Your Eyes (1997), is on the rise in the Spanish world of cinema as he has recently made a successful film.Nonetheless, he is now struggling to come up with an equal or better idea for his next film when Ignacio Rodriguez (Gael García Bernal), from Amores perros (2000), Y tu mamá también (2001), and the recent Motorcycle Diaries (2004), appears from out of the blue.Together Enrique and Ignacio used to attend a private catholic school where sexual and physical abuse was predominantly common while the Spanish dictator Francisco Franco heavily tainted the school regulations.They were close friends, but they also discovered their first love in one another in the unforgiving school run by Catholic priests.Now years later they reunite, as Ignacio offers him a film script that he has written based on their time at the Catholic School.

At first, the film seems to focus on the Catholic School where Ignacio was a victim of severe sexual abuse, which is told through the screenplay.This is a clever curveball that Almodóvar throws at the audience, but it is necessary to understand what happens as the development of the story rests in the past of Ignacio and Enrique.However, this review will not elaborate on the notion of what happens next, as it would skew the initial experience with the film.Nonetheless, the script that Ignacio gives to Enrique portrays a world where Ignacio seeks a way to have an operation to reach what he desires the most - to be a woman.Cleverly, Almodóvar throws out the gender boundaries of film noir, as he exchanges his femme fatale for a man that seeks womanhood through modern technology.This displays Almodóvar's ingenious way of telling a captivating story, as it does not follow the conventional rules that often make films one of dozens.

As mentioned previously, the film does not concentrate on the Catholic Church, but instead the aftermath of Ignacio's education.Through several turns the film illustrates what happen to Ignacio.Much of this goes back to his years when the head priest sought him out for his own pleasure, which continues to trouble Ignacio well into adulthood.This seems to be the reason why Ignacio wrote the script in the first place, as he tried to exorcise his demons while trying to find an existence that fits with his upbringing and education.The story drifts between Enrique reading the script to the present time with occasional flashbacks that provide additional information in regards to the story.Initially, it might seem a little confusing, however, Almodóvar has been nice enough to add a couple of side bars whenever there is a flashback or a scene from the script that Enrique reads.Eventually, the audience will have gone through a very troubling, yet spellbinding tale that makes All About Eve (1950) seem like a Cinderella story.

Excellent acting from Bernal
García Bernal is not only doing one, but three roles in the same movie, and he plays them all convincingly. Seeing dressed in drag is quite an experience. However, the movie is darker than previous Almodovar works, because of the nature of the plot: church, sex and homosexuality. Those are touchy subjects, but Almodovar makes us watch by using a well played game of role reversals and twists. It's and enjoyable film, I recommend it. ... Read more

Reviews (47)

Love & Tumult in 1968 Paris
Once past the excessive, graphic nudity, or perhaps because of it, Bertolucci fashions a jarring glimpse of three fascinating young people against the backdrop of the 1968 French General Strike, which nearly toppled the government. For the three principals, hedonism, narcissism, and intoxication seem to dominate against what appear as lightly held political beliefs - socialism, love, compassion, tolerance. For example, siblings Theo and Isabelle sleep together naked, their sculpted bodies entwined. The All-American Matthew (well played by Michael Pitt) comes upon them sleeping nude (and slowly grows to love them), gathering some deeper yet perplexing knowledge. This learning process for Matthew weaves its way throughout the film: a likable youth from San Diego doing his best to slip into the idiosyncratic lives of these very French '60s eccentrics and their almost invisible, '60s uptight parents.

Bertolucci abruptly intercuts continuously with memorable past film scenes: for example, Garbo's soulful eyes laughing at Gilbert's insipid love from "Queen Christina." There are many of these lovely, thoughtful old film scenes that weld the humanity of these three characters to that of past lovers and haters. I found myself virtually loathing the insouciance of Theo and Isabelle, their adolescent adoration of things kitsch, such as Delacroix's 'Liberty Leading the People" with Liberty's face that of Marilyn Monroe. All this while exchanging drunk, violent words over politics, cinema and ragout when true fighters faced the formidable barricades in the streets of Paris.

But this is a film, I think, that one must settle into. Much of the first half appears about nothing much, perhaps a light titillating comedy. Slowly, we understand it is not that at all. The nudity, arguments, sex, politics, brilliant film cuts, and memorable period scoring give satisfaction to those of us 'lucky' enough to have lived through that tumultuous time. Perhaps younger, less authoritarian generations will view it with more intuition than we boomers. One of the director's realized intentions was to impart with his typical lyricism an inner realization of why love, even silly vacuous sex, is so much preferable to war (the General Strike and Vietnam, here). The ending is doubly startling. But by then, the parts have become the whole, the trivial vital. The significant beauty of this film lies in the director's wise, consummate vision. Well worth seeing. (For an amazingly contrasting view of the same period, see "Fog of War").

An Incisive Criticism of the '60s and Hypocrisy
The Dreamers is a new, primarily English-language film from the Italian king of cinematic controversy, Bernardo Bertolucci. If you've seen his past works, including 1900 and Last Tango in Paris, they provide a fairly clear idea of what to expect in this NC-17 foray into 1960's youth culture in France. The film is an extended analysis, really, of radicalism and some of the hypocrisies seemingly inherent in it. It forces us to confront the question of what truly is revolutionary, or conservative for that matter. The film answers that question in a way many of us will find unexpected.

Matthew (Michael Pitt) is an American student spending time abroad in France. He takes in the student protests with wide eyes, gazing in awe at the pure passion igniting these young people. Though the period is the '60s, Matthew still reflects the tucked-in conservatism of a decade past, wearing a jacket and tie almost as a shield from the craziness surrounding him. He soon meets two French siblings, Isabelle and Theo (Eva Green and Louis Garrel), both of whom are full of the revolutionary spirit. They are new and therefore attractive to Matthew, who shares a mutual love of movies with both. Not long after, he moves into the home of his two new friends, whose parents have gone away on an extended trip.

Now is the time audience members may begin to squirm. In between quoting movies to one another and acting out favorite scenes, Matthew begins to notice an unnaturally clingy relationship exists between Isa and Theo--they sleep and bathe together, and play sexually-laced games that often leave one in some state of undress. But this quasi-incest has a strange effect on Matthew, as slowly, the jacket and tie disappear, he begins to walk around barely dressed, and he starts to take part in the sex games, at first begrudgingly and then yearningly.

But as intoxicated as Matthew becomes with the lifestyle, he also is disturbed when Isa confides in him that she's never been on a date before. Harboring some genuine feelings for the young beauty, Matthew tries to lead her away from a life entirely dependent upon Theo and toward one of independence. In this way, the film draws a very interesting parallel. It really is conservatism--a resistance to change--that is keeping so-called radicals Isa and Theo in their exclusive relationship. The young innocent, Matthew, has become the revolutionary in trying to shatter what has become the comfortable tradition.

The film boasts three good, but not great performances. With stronger leading work, a good film could possibly have reached the next level. Gilbert Adair's screenplay, based on his own novel, is wonderfully subtle in weaving its critique of the radical movement, but is in fact so subtle that in some ways the film feels "small." Nevertheless, the film raises probing questions, particularly in the last scene, as a throng of protesters march down a street, all chanting in unison, not a single one distinguishable from the next. It begs the old question, "If a group of anarchists organize an anarchists' meeting, are they really anarchists anymore?"

Finally, credit must be heaped upon Fox Searchlight for not yielding to any suggestion that Bertolucci's vision be compromised by editing the film to achieve an R rating. Even without such censorship, it is disturbing enough that film footage of bare genitals and some sex is considered more damaging by the MPAA than, for example, the wholesale slaughter of recent horror offerings. In any case, when going to see The Dreamers, leave any prudish tendencies (or family members) at home.

Final Grade: B

Bold, brave and inquisitive
Bertolucci displays with this unnecessarily controversial movie more bravery than many other directors half his age. Anyone who is young should see it to observe the contradictions that youth's idealism brings upon the three protagonists. Anyone who is older should watch it to remember the bravery of times gone by, to remember a time when many of us still believed protests could change the world and to acknowledge the validity of both youth's panache and experience's fountain of knowledge.

Not all said up front
There are alot of things that are underneath the serface of this film. You might have to watch the film more than once to get it all. Things that have to obtained from the time and the charecters themselves.(I will not ruin them for you finding them is half the fun) The film is not one that you watch when you are bored with your buddys it is a film that takes all your attention to actually get it.The film ends with no changes in the people only an experience that changed their lives but could not change who they were nomatter how much they tried. I hate movies that charecters change because of an experience this movie seems real in that aspect because the people dont change. It is a little overthe top in certain aspects but it makes you think and is an enjoyable experience.

dreamy
Beautiful, disturbing, erotic, political, comic, thrilling, and thoroughly immersing. One of the most satisfying cinematic experiences I've had in a long time. Not to be missed! Much thanks to Bertolucci, who continues to make exquisite and exciting films! ... Read more

Reviews (332)

Open Mind Folks!
We have been watching this movie in our eighth grade English class, as well as reading the play Romeo and Juliet, as well as meeting with our Shakespearean expert who just happens to work at our school to act out scenes. Not only that, but we have also been studying the Shakespeare's time period. That being said, let me also say that Shakespeare was not this serious man who didn't understand comedy. In fact it was quite the opposite. True, Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy but is a comedy as well. That's how most of his works are. An example of this is how he would cast men as women. Just the sight of this would bring laughs from the audience. With all that understood, the movie Romeo and Juliet is a great adaptation.
We have only watched the first 30 minutes, and I might add more to this review once we finish it, or when I get the DVD, whichever comes first! But I loved the newscaster as the chorus. What a creative touch. As for the swords or guns controversy, this is set in modern times. Who uses swords in our day? But to keep the Old English was smart. After all, what is Romeo and Juliet without Old English? It would not be the same. I mean, the famous Queen Mab's speech in anything but Old English? Hard to imagine. And te contrast between Old English and modern times was a very interesting one. And even if it was written in today's language, it would be too much like West Side Story. They wanted to stick to the roots of Romeo and Juliet. Also for all those people who criticized Mercutio for being a drag queen, he is not a drag queen or a transvestite. Well what can I say? This is the modern version. The performance given by Leonardo DiCaprio is great, he speaks Old English like he's spoken it his entire life. However Juliet, I don't quite agree with. I don't think she brought her best to this film. The acting isn't the best and she looks quite bland compared to Romeo, who is quite handsome, and I don't really understand the whole Cuban thing with Juliet's family.
All in all, a great film, one that must be seen with an open mind, otherwise don't even bother to watch it at all. It was filmed to show today's fourteen year old's that yes, Shakespeare lived in the 1600's and true, Romeo and Juliet takes place in the 1400's but it has a universal message of love, one that can still be understood today, even if it is 2004.

My Favorite Flic
Hi, to whoever's reading this, thanks for taking the time to see what I have to say. I won't say that this was one of the most brilliant movies ever, even though I think so, cause that's my opinion. If you have not seen it yet, you should watch it. Shakespeare is my favorite writer and also one of the most awesome, influential people in the entire history of man. He's able to capture you in two hours and not let you go. Romeo and Juliet is a passionate, beautifully written love story that takes in the kind of love everyone dreams about. I must admit that I rented the movie at first for two reasons: because I was a huge fan of Shakespeare and had read the story hundreds of times already, and also because of well...Leonardo DiCaprio. (He is pretty hot, you have to admit). Anyways, to all those who hated this movie, open your mind! The performances were not perfect I know, but who is perfect anyway? They all put forth their best effort. In the end, it became a popular, amazing movie that's great for couples to watch together!

It Almost Worked for me, but...
Read kerki and Eric's review. I won't be redundant and say the same things, because I agree wholeheartedly. Visually, this was quite stunning..beautiful. The outlandish, as they say "MTV" look was good, kinky, modern. If they would have dropped the accents and brought Shakespeare's words into today's vernacular, I probably would have given it 5 stars. The new story idea was that good. The cast was delicious, as were the sets. It's really too bad. With just the one change to modern English, this could have become a cult classic. As stands now, I'll just keep watching Zeferrelli's version forever. Now, that's Shakespeare.

I don't think Shakespeare's rolling in his grave, but...
Maybe my viewing experience of this film was tainted when, while seeing it in the theatre, one of the 13 year old girls sitting in the row in front of me turned to the other and said, "is Leo going to talk link this THE WHOLE TIME?".

For a Shakespeare purist (as I am myself), the problem is not the modernization of the setting and the use of the language in that setting (I personally love it), but it's the absolutle murder of the language by the majority of the cast that makes my skin crawl. This movie, in terms of the execution of the script, does a disservice in getting kids hooked on the poetry of Shakespeare's writing.

However, I will admit that visually it's great. The setting is apt. Mercutio is amazing. But, teachers, I would think twice about showing this version to your class.

The Best movie ever
This movie is awesome Leonardo DiCaprio is the best Romeo yet ... Read more

Amazon.com

When 12-year-old Renato, riding through his small Italian town on his new bicycle, sees the voluptuous Malèna, little does he know he's launching on an infatuation that will carry him through the tumultuous days of World War II. Malèna begins as an enraptured depiction of Renato's adolescent mind--the way he stares, hypnotized, at Malèna's garters pressing through the material of her tight skirt, or his frustrated rebellion against the indignity of wearing short pants--but soon transforms into a portrait of small-town prejudice. Malèna's looks spark lust and envy in the townspeople; when her husband dies in combat, the gossip only intensifies, to the point that Malèna is dragged into court to defend herself against accusations of adultery. When the women of the town refuse to sell her edible food at the market, Malèna has little choice but to become what she's been unjustly accused of being. At the end, a twist of fate turns this tale of longing and jealousy into a heartbreaking love story. Monica Bellucci exudes the can't-help-it eroticism that makes Malèna such a lightning rod for everyone's desires; she's like a more zaftig Isabelle Adjani. The movie seems to wander at times, but the ending has a powerful emotional impact. From the director of Cinema Paradiso. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (79)

One of the best!
Malena is truly a great film. It works on so many levels. I have a relative who doesn't usually like foreign films but had to admit this is a great one. Its funny, its sad and it has a message. The story of the beautiful Malena is one that is heart-breaking. Malena is a beautiful woman whose husband is fighting in World War II and is left alone in this town. She is subjected to constant rumours and harassment by the men and women in their village.

Renato is the young boy obsessed with her. He is also the only person who knows the truth about her and knows she doesn't do the things people say she does. Malena wasn't dating everyone, she was sewing for people into the night, carrying her husband's picture and dancing to their favorite music. The sad thing is that Malena has to become what everyone had labeled her once word got back that her husband was killed. Women refused to sell her food and she had to sleep with men to survive. There is a scene towards the end that really upset me. This movie shows how rotten both the men and the women were to her. Malena shows how dangerous lies and assumptions are to a person's standing in their community and their own self-respect.

Malena is a very funny movie at times. There are scenes with Renato that made me laugh out loud. However, its a film that goes deeper than many out there. I would have to say this has become one of my all-time favorites. A beautiful, thought-provoking film.

A Beautiful Film
This lovely and heart-wrenching movie was made even more special by the fact that the two main characters barely speak (well, one of them IS the narrator). I had never heard of the beautiful actress Monica Belluci (Malena) but now look forward to seeing her perform again. She was exquisite and spoke volumes with just her facial expressions.

Giuseppe Sulfaro played Renato, a young boy feeling the first stirring of his sexual awakening who falls in love/lust with the beautiful Malena. His acting was very touching, especially when he goes to the church and lights a candle every day to try to ensure that Malena will come to no harm.

This coming of age film about love, jealousy, ostracism, and hate during four tumultuous years of World War II was filmed on the coast of Sicily - and what beautiful cinematography it was. The score was also magnificent, befitting the gorgeous setting.

ETMR - Malena
1. Humanity: The boy Renato, we learn, is a free spirit. He expresses, out of all the characters in the film, the willingness to step outside his natural, cultural boundaries and grow past his traditional philosophy. This film is not only about the life of Malena, but also about Renato's growth into an adult. What events force Renato to grow into this new kind of thinking?

2. Implications: The film shows the evolution of Europe, and the break from traditional values, not only through Renato but through the insanity of the war. In what ways does the movie show a critical eye to the old world?

3. Evolution: In what ways is the movie distinctly European, and yet more in detail, distinctly Italian? Do you think the film is trying to make a general statement on the madness of war, or is it trying to make a visceral attack on the rigidity of Italian traditionalism?

4. Realism: The story premise is interesting: imagine if you had a guardian angel in the form of a young boy, but you never knew he existed... do you think the set-up of the story was meant to describe an actual sequence of events with the boy, or is the movie playing a more important role with symbolism?

5. Stageplay: The script provides for a seedier look at the foundations of Fascist Italy. Do you think what was included was sufficient, do you think it was lacking in raw material, or do you think it contained too much teenage sensuality?

Lopsided film that doesn't have much life
This is a story of an Italian boy who grows a adolescent infatuation with a married woman who is so beautiful that she is horribly gossiped about. Here are the reasons this is a bad film. 1)The film often drifts into the fantasies of the main character(all of them are about Malena). At one point, this is so prevalent you wonder sometimes what's real and not. You also start to wonder why the filmaker did this and I have no real answer except that he couldn't come up with anything else. These dream sequences pull the film away from a grounding reality that the film fails to establish. 2)The title character is almost non-existant as a real character. We see her in real life and in fantasy, but she hardly says anything, or reveals anything about her inner character. This makes her a hollow basis for the film because she is in fact hollow and the character who is infatuated is vacuous as well. 3) The combination of these characteristics makes this film get to its conclusion heavyhandedly and it never feels real even if the results at the time were close to what we see. Dramatically, it's just dumb and vacuous. You wish it were more because you feel that Malena would have something interesting to say, but the filmaker chose not to. These things only approach my biggest gripes with the film. The gossip sequences, which are many, seem flippant and careless, and not the razor-sharped judgement that they would have to be in order to be a real factor in her life, which they are in the film. Sloppy, just sloppy storytelling. How the film ends is also very telling of just how bad this film truly is. He speaks about how he's loved many women, but the one he remembers best is Malena, the ideal that never came to grips with. An ending like this would be good if the film developed a relationship beyond what is in this film. This would be compelling if the protagonist was someone with more of a vocal perspective rather than a visual one. As is, it would have been far more effective to use yet another fantasy to illustrate her historic importance to him, but by then I'm sure that the film would seem incredibly redundant because of the rest of it. If this film had established the strong importance of the difference between fantasy and reality and how the protagonist felt about that it would be better. The film doesn't take this road, however, by putting in the scenes of harsh realism which aren't earned from the deadpan, flippant tone of the rest of the film.

La Bella Bellucci
Titillating, tantalizing, and tragic are just a few adjectives that come to mind...It takes no genius to realize Monica Bellucci is one of the most drop dead gorgeous international beauties of the current cinema. She is the Italian version bonafide beauty of Catherine Zeta Jones ! If that isn't saying much...

Belucci seems to play recurring roles of women in great distress and abuse.She does this so convincingly and makes it look so effortless that she is a rare actress who can say much with her facial expressions and actions without really saying much; It's all in the eyes, baby. Malena is the telling of a 27 year old widow left to fend for herself in a small Italian village after the downfall of her husband during WW2.No one will employ her and the women sell her rotten food;it's cruelty in severe doses for Malena. Her father has disowned her due to false allegations of being the town temptress. Men and boys alike fantasize and want her. The women hate her. In comes a young 12 year old boy named Renato Amoroso who develops an obsessive crush over Malena but guards her and holds vigil from afar. This "crush" is what propels Renato into becoming and maturing into a young man who begins to understand that there is much more to romance and life than just lustful sex. He watches and follows Malena secretly and witnesses the many transformations she goes through to survive in a town that has turned hostile against her simply because of her striking beauty ! All of this will culminate towards an unexpected ending which will leave a strong impression to stay with Renato for the rest of his life!

Cinematography is...well, it's filmed in Italy, what more can I say except stunning panoramic views of the Italian coastline.Plenty of comedic and colorful characters in the beginning. The film starts off with much humor when the viewer is permitted to see into Renato's mind concerning fantasies of farce and romance. But things turn sinister as a town bent on hate begins to enclose on Malena... The film score by Ennio Morricone is extrememly effective, captures the time period and also is very likeable and memorable ! The best surround effects take place during a German air raid over the town. You can also hear great detail in the surrounds of the ocean waves crashing and wind rustling through trees;this transports the viewer to an Italian vacation. The only gripe is that this Miramax dvd version of Malena is missing about 12 to 17 minutes of scenes that were included in the Italian or European release.This was due to more nudity involving Belluci's character and some scenes that raised eyebrows between more explicit sexual fantasies of Renato's. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Sweetness that doesn't turn saccharine is hard to find these days; Finding Neverland hits the mark. Much credit is due to the actors: Johnny Depp applies his genius for sly whimsy in his portrayal of playwright J. M. Barrie, who finds inspiration for his greatest creation from four lively boys, the sons of widow Sylvia Llewelyn Davies (Kate Winslet, who miraculously fuses romantic yearning with common sense). Though the friendship threatens his already dwindling marriage, Barrie spends endless hours with the boys, pretending to be pirates or Indians--and gradually the elements of Peter Pan take shape in his mind. The relationship between Barrie and the Llewelyn Davies family sparks both an imagined world and a quiet rebellion against the stuffy forces of respectability, given physical form by Barrie's resentful wife (Radha Mitchell, High Art) and Sylvia's mother (Julie Christie, McCabe and Mrs. Miller). This gentle silliness could have turned to treacle, but Depp and Winslet--along with newcomer Freddie Highmore as one of the boys--keep their feet on the earth while their eyes gaze into their dreams. Also featuring a comically crusty turn from Dustin Hoffman (who appeared in another Peter Pan-themed movie, Hook) as a long-suffering theater producer. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (245)

A very beautiful movie.
I agree with T burger.I did do some research after watching this & the main point of the movie is the same.He created this world after meeting & falling in love with those boys.If they made every movie that's based on fact word for word they would probably be boring.They're usually loosely based & meant more to entertain than to inform.I loved it.Story, great, sets, great.Johnny Depp Double great.

wow...
This movie is truly captivating. I am a sucker for fantasy-sort and movies packed with lots of imaginiation. I guess its the kid coming out of me. (which doesn't often go away)
This movie really does make you go back and remember all your dreams as a little child. Wishing you could fly, dreaming of far off places, magic, fantasy lands, and so on.
The reason for this movie is to take a look at how Peter Pan related to its author and his life. It is really interesting to see the parallels between the movie and the events and people he had in his life. I highly recommend it. Its touching and captivating.

Handsome-looking, sentimental tripe
Marc Forster's FINDING NEVERLAND isn't a bad movie, I suppose. In its depiction of playwright J.M. Barrie's creation of the classic PETER PAN, it has its occasional moments of real wide-eyed wonder (mostly during re-enactments of moments in the actual play), and it has generally fine performances from its cast---not even the prestige-pic atmosphere of this movie can keep the wide-ranging actor Johnny Depp down. And, of course, the movie looks sumptuous and handsome (which counts for something in my book).

But FINDING NEVERLAND is yet another example of the kind of sentimental, non-threatening tripe that Hollywood has a tendency to produce and foist upon the masses during Oscar season. This particular Oscar-bait picture has as its mantra "Just believe," but the movie rarely ever elicits the same sense of innocent wonder that this film's Barrie clearly believes in. (Its brief "fantasy" sequences---which includes Barrie dancing with a dog, or Barrie playing a pirate with a widower's kids---are too cheesily done to make us believe in anything.) Nor does it have much of a sharp edge to its potentially disturbing depiction of a writer's sudden fixation on the widower's kids; his attraction to the innocence of these kids---at least, in most of the kids; one of them, played by Freddie Highmore, still carries the pain and anger of loss with him---is depicted (and romanticized) by Forster and screenwriter David Magee as mostly pure and rather beautiful. (Yea right; so is Michael Jackson's, too?) By smoothing away almost all of the rough edges, by manipulating events to fit its banal message, by toning down Johnny Depp's usual actorly exuberance, Marc Forster comes up with a film that, for all its impressive production values, is never very intellectually stimulating. It's insufferably pleasant rather than challenging. Is it deeply moving? For me, not really; when Forster finally unveils his visual depiction of Neverland towards the end, it is mawkish rather than transporting; so is its final scene, in which Barrie tells disillusioned young Peter Davies to "just believe" that his relatives still live on.

Look, it's a nice idea, to be able to hold on to your child-like innocence and all that. But, just because you become an adult, that doesn't mean you have to lose your imagination or sense of child-like wonder. (That's one of the things movies can do best---but not this movie.) But it's hardly a good idea either to be as child-like as this film's Barrie is; in this difficult world, you'd never survive if your only purpose in life was to remain an innocent child throughout, the way Barrie tries to be. Growing up is something everybody has to do; it's something FINDING NEVERLAND apparently doesn't believe in. It's better to remain a naive kid rather than live in the real world. And of course this potentially dangerous philosophy gets applause from gullible viewers who find the movie "enchanting": it's a fantasy that appeals to them, which is precisely why I think the film is intellectually empty. Sorry if that sounds terribly cynical, but that personal reaction to the film's message is the only way I can explain why there was only one scene in the movie that genuinely moved me: a scene in which an angry Peter Davies shouts out to Barrie, "I will not be lied to." It's the only scene with any real dramatic weight to it, because it is the closest the movie comes to challenging its own sentimental, simple-minded "just believe" philosophy. Peter has glimpsed the cold, hard reality of death, and is trying to deal with it in his own way; this film's Barrie, instead, would probably try to tell himself that no one ever really dies, as long as his/her memory is kept alive. Again, a comforting notion; but it can be plain delusional to deny the harsh reality of death.

FINDING NEVERLAND is well-made enough that it's worth the 3 stars I'm granting it here. The movie probably makes worthy family entertainment; there's nothing all that offensive for parents to get too worried about. But if you're expecting something truly insightful or deeply moving from this trite Hollywood prestige pic, you might be disappointed. For all of its adult pretensions, FINDING NEVERLAND is, at heart, as childish as its real-life hero.

Neverland not the place to be
Johnny Depp put in a good performance in this movie. And that's the problem. I expect an actor of his caliber to show me something on the screen that will blow me away every single time. (Sorry about that,but Johnny has spoiled me). Instead what I saw was an actor reigned in. Did the money-mafia intercede somewhere along the line and say "no funny stuff..we're going for main stream here. Think Oscar."Kate Winslet just was not credible in the role of a woman dying of a progressive, wasting disease.Really?!When Barrie finally reveals Neverland to her, supposedly on the eve of her death, she looks like nothing but the beautiful English girl that she is. As fresh and as robust as the proverbial milkmaid. As for Julie Christie and Dustin Hoffman...what about them? Their parts could of been played by actors of lesser talent and the final product would not have suffered for it . This is not the worst movie ever made but it's got to be the worst misuse of acting talent in recent history. Finding Neverland is a medicore commercial product. The invitation implied gourmet but on arrival I got fast food. And I really, reallywanted to LIKE this movie.

An amazing movie, never mind the background...
Although I understand that J. M. Barrie was not perfect, there is no reason to relate him to the "Michael Jackson" scandal. It might be true that he *was* a pedophile, but in this movie, nothing of the sort was shown. The movie is *based* upon events that happened in the past, but is not a documentary of any sort or kind, and therefore cannot be deemed untruthful. Since the movie is not a historical film, nor does it portray any sort of pedophilia, it is unjust to give this movie a bad review for the past events.

Depp came across as a truly kind being who became very close with a family, and especially with that family's kids. He enjoyed being around them because maybe he felt that they needed a father figure, or maybe that he saw himself in the children and just wanted to have fun with them because he had no children of his own. Depp played Barrie in a manner which might have not been accurate, but his performance was amazing.

Winslet, who as well gives a rather good performance, fits with Depp like pieces of a puzzle, and the dynamics between Depp and the boys are amazing in all scenarios.

Overall, this was a stunning movie, and never you mind the reviews that say that this film was boring or stupid. This brings out emotion in almost everyone, from kids to seniors, and the only people who don't find it interesting are those who dislike a movie that actually has a good plot/doesn't have "action"/actually has in-depth characters.

I HIGHLY HIGHLY RECCOMEND THAT YOU PUT THIS ON THE TOP OF YOUR LIST TO RENT OR BUY. I GUARANTEE THAT IF YOU WATCH IT ONCE, JUST ONCE, YOU WILL FALL IN LOVE WITH IT IMMEDIATELY. ... Read more