lostein

Tears came to my eyes from the first scene. I loved seeing the end play out and the series come to the close. But there is no doubt in my mind that the drive to make it 3-D drove the filmmakers to put too much emphasis on action and took away from character interactions. Sadly, I fear this is the future of films. I was very sad that they chose to pump up the fighting at the end but took out the wonderful scene of Percy Weasley's return to the fold. Also, Alberforth's story is reduced to a line or 2 and we learn nothing of Albus' abuse of power. Even the central revelation of Snape's back-story is reduced. This again, is triumph of special effects over character... and it was the characters that made these books great. It's worth seeing and fans will love it...but it could have been so much better.

I was shocked to see so many bad reviews for this film as I had been so looking forward to it. I went to a matinée in part to save money and to avoid crowds. Well, all I can say is that once again the professional critics got it wrong. I was so happily surprised to find the negative reviews were wrong and that Ice Age 3 has all the elements that made the first two wonderful: great characters, wonderful dialog and tight, fast paced plot and stunning visuals. This installment was as delightful and fun as the first two. I laughed out loud so often - it was such a tonic. The film is was just gorgeous to watch; I saw it in regular, not 3-D and actually I am glad of that. I would be afraid of being distracted by the gimmick. Being unemployed I am happy to save the money a 3-D ticket adds. There are some truly touching moments that are effective in part because they are a surprise - to me anyway...but totally believable. I can't wait for Ice Age 4!!!

I am in a state of shock. For most of the film I felt it did a good job of capturing the things that made Star Trek great: good science fiction, human characters that had a sense of humor, a sense of wonder. The actors, particularly those playing Kirk, McCoy and Spock, did a great job of capturing the essence of the characters. Then, the ending. My companions and I tried to grasp the reality of what we had just seen...a total wipe-out of Trek history. We were sure the original time-line was going to be restored at the end of the film, but no. Its clear that this film was meant to be the start of a money making reboot of the brand. That's the only thing that explains the ending...not to mention the absurd relationship between Uhuru and Spock. How can they make Uhuru, an officer and member of the bridge crew, into booty call for a Vulcan? Frankly, as a fan who watched Star Trek from the first night the show was on the air, I feel betrayed. Very sad. Glad I have my own copies of the original movies and can ignore this one. I won't be recommending it to anyone.

I must confess I am a devoted fan of the 1939 classic film but I was interested to see how a so called fresh approach to Baum's material would work. I don't know if it was the commercials, the mediocre acting by the 2 main leads or too many CGI gimmicks that lost my interest...but by Part 3 I was long past caring. The actress playing DG seemed often to be out of sink with what she was supposed to be going on around her. Her reactions were often non-existent. The actor playing the title character (why WAS he the title?) also seemed to be elsewhere. Alan Cumming as Glitch is the one truly bright spot in the production and his talent saved the day. There seemed to be a real relish to showing torture and weirdness. I also thought there were many holes in the plot. The biggest for me was just why the evil Sorceress (the actress's main talent seemed to be her tiny waistline) want to blot out the Suns... oh, wait, I guess she doesn't care about food, or that anyone else in the OZ would ever have anything to eat. Will be a problem getting good help eventually. Also, if The Queen and the Seeker know that keeping the emerald a secret is so important, why keep items that can be used to track his whereabouts? It was way too convenient. It would have been much more believable if he had kept the dolls...but not in the place where he also took DG to hide. Duh! On the one hand we are given references to the 1939 film (apples, the Brick Road, sneaking into the "witches" lair by pretending to be her guards) but then they say that the founder of the royal line was...Dorothy Gale, the original "slipper" into the Outer Zone. Now, maybe this is in Baum's books, but Dorothy Gale got safely home to Kansas in the film... so how did she found a lineage? All in all, they would have been better off with less time and better actors.

I was very impressed with the acting all across the board. I thought Russell was great...maybe its the role, maybe its Denzel always being Denzel, but I thought Russell had the harder, less flashy but more nuanced role and he was great. But all the many supporting players rose to the occasion. I was surprised to see some actors I hadn't realized would be in the film like Joe Morton and Ted Levine. I think the big revelation is Josh Brolin...this should make his career if he doesn't blow it picking bad projects down the road. Many of the scenes will haunt you... and there is a line (don't worry, I won't give it away) that really cracked-up me and my 3 friends who all work in law firms, we just burst out laughing. I think you'll know it when you hear it.

One indication of how people felt.... even at its long running time there was hardly any movement...i.e. people getting up to hit the restrooms... people seemed riveted.

This film brought back the wonderful days of movie-making from the 30's - 50's when yes there were stars but supporting players also got a lot of attention and good material. There is a lot of texture, wonderful cinematography and food for the mind. I will be seeing it again.

As a longtime fan of Russell Crowe, I do know that he can be funny, charming, sweet and romantic, not only on film but in real life. His recent appearances on the TV promotional circuit have proved this once again. Those who only know his films since LA Confidential for the most part focus on his ability to capture and project power, strength and inner turmoil. Those who have seen his films such as Proof, For the Moment, Love In Limbo and The Sum of Us have seen his ability to show the gentler, funnier and often more uncertain sides of the human experience. (I would also argue that these are readily seen in his films such as The Insider, A Beautiful Mind and Cinderella Man.) A Good Year is a wonderful return to the Russell of those earlier films. Like a Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers movie, you know just where it's likely going to take you, but with such lovely, engaging people in such a wonderful setting you just want to enjoy the trip. And so you shall. What a refreshing change from the overheated, oversexed, over special "effected" and over bloodied fare that Hollywood usually dishes out. Thank you so much Mr. Crowe and Mr. Scott for my little vacation in the South of France!

Let's get one thing out of the way right off...this isn't a movie about boxing. This is a movie about family, about the real responsibilities of being a parent, about meeting those responsibilities. Yes, boxing is the canvas and it is presented with no romance or softness. But the focus of this film is Jim Braddock and his wife Mae and how they faced and triumphed as a family in the face of horrible challenges. It has heart, humor and horror of life on the edge. The acting is uniformly superb. Russell Crowe once again shows his mastery of the small moment, the subtle facial expressions, the power of the eyes. Rene Zellwegger rises to his challenge and puts in a surprisingly restrained and powerful performance as his partner in life. Their children are allowed to be children, not sassy Hollywood smart mouths. While many in the supporting roles shine, Paul Giamatti is brilliant as manager Joe Gould. He and Russell create a rapport the likes of Hope and Crosby. This is a movie for adults and those with adult sensibilities. If all you want is special effects, pass this by. If you want a thrilling piece of entertainment that will transport you to another time and place, if you want acting at its best, this is the movie for you.

I love this movie for a number of reasons. First, its just a beautiful setting. Second, John Sayles does not succumb to Hollywood norms and resort to special effects, rock songs or cheap dramatic plot twists to jazz up what seems to be a simple folk tale. Most of all, I love that all of the characters are allowed their humanity and dignity. Fiona, the 10 year girl who is at the center of the film, follows her curiosity in a brave but realistic way, never spouting wise cracks so common with most American child characters. Imagine being told an old family story by your favorite Uncle or Grandfather while sitting around a living room late at night, with only the low light provided by the glow of a fire or one old lamp so nothing distracts your imagination's journey. That is what this film is like...

The images in this film stay with you your whole life... I saw it on TV as a child and have watched it again and again over the years. As an adventure film it set the standard. King Kong is so much more than The Beast... his creator imbued him with heart and soul that makes the climax touching, not just exciting. And once you've seen it you can't see the Empire State Building without looking for that big ape climbing up the side. I just read that Fay Wray has died. Time has done what the Beast would not.

I have heard that Peter Jackson wants to remake this film. I am filled with dread. He will puff it up with overdone special effects and gut the soul. If you haven't had the pleasure of seeing this movie...go now!

It is not often when a movie based on beloved books actually exceeds one's expectations. Having accepted the reality that no 2 hour film could have everything, or even a 10th of the information that's in the books, I was hoping for something that would give the feeling, the experience...the thrill one gets sitting in one's arm chair. Weir, Crowe and Bettany, and all the behind the scenes artists have certainly done that and more. From the crowded quarters, the friendships, the dangerous daily routines, the ear pounding canon fire to the Naval traditions, its all there with heart and thought. Casting is uniformly excellent, with special mention going to the actors portraying Tom Pullings and Lord Blakeney. I knew Crowe and Bettany would be wonderful.... the young actors, James D'Arcy and Max Pirkis, new to me, were a wonderful surprise.

Simply spectacular to see, I wish the movie had been longer... and how often do you say that?!

Huzzah, Huzzah, Huzzah and an extra round of grog to all!

While someone must have thought this an interesting premise - watch a couple fall apart, rather than come together - its an experiment that didn't work. Without seeing why these 2 people were together in the first place, their constant arguing leaves you wondering what all the fuss is about. However, with that said, for those interested in seeing early films of Russell Crowe, this is a small goldmine. He doesn't get beat up, he doesn't die, and he actually has some love/sex scenes. Crowe also gets to show a little of his comic side, which has been under used since coming to the US to make films. So, while the script would have been better left on the film school floor, or at least left in the computer for more work, this film has definite goodies to recommend it. Any film with Russell in a bathtub can't be all bad....

Sex, murder, intrigue, moves and countermoves, all the stuff that really juicy mini-series are made of...and its a true story. The original introduction that ran with the PBS showing stated that Ian Fleming used Sidney Reilly as the basis of James Bond. Sidney, as played by the great Sam Neill certainly embodies all the trademark qualities of that later spy...a way with a gun and the ladies, a wry sense of humor and a cold, calculating methodolgy. The series covers the time period of the Great Game, when Europe, Russia and England tried to out move each other in access to the newly emerging oil fields of the Middle East. Echoes of that period - approximately (forgive my fading memory) 1895 to 1922 - are still bouncing around the world. Sam Neill is extraordinary as the first great professional spy who set the standard for those who came after, changing it from a gentleman's game to a deadly serious career path. I remember watching some news footage at the time of the fall of the Soviet Union. The reporter said that people were tearing down a statue of the founder of the KGB in front of its Headquarters. "Felix Derzhinsky in front of the Lubianka Prison!" I called out to the TV... I knew because of having watched its birth in Sidney Reilly... eventually, the news got it right. If you love history and great drama...this is for you.