rohansrider

One of the most poignant love stories I have ever seen. It is so sad that it will tug at your heart. All actors are superb. The script is correct and the narrative believable. Filmed in New Zealand it portrays perfectly the bleakness of the life of a lonely lighthouse keeper. Tom finds love and with it comes tragedy, A must see film for those who love fine acting. The story unfolds slowly and there are no surprises, there is an inevitability about it all, but the ending is quite perfect and satisfactory .

Interesting views here; terribly polarized. Appears to be a love it or hate it movie and as for me I think I know why its detractors were so disappointed. Given the wonderful ensemble cast I think they expected a stronger plot line and narrative building up to the revelation of the "mole". This did not happen and because the film was too short the final few minutes with the "mole " revealed were a let-down. I usually love a good thriller/whodunnit but this did not measure up. I challenge anyone to declare that they knew who was the mole by evidence shown. I don't think Smiley was really sure an in any case there were no definitive reasons given for why the "mole" was a double-agent. I found Smiley rather tedious and I did have the odd yawn. The flash back technique was at times confusing, and the film feels to be rather pretentious,almost implying that it's very cerebral and if you don't like it then you must be a moron. I am not a moron; I was not expecting an action packed film by any means but this was too slow. The lack of character development was also a mistake. It falls into the category to watch again on DVD and maybe I will appreciate the nuances and tiny clues. As someone already said not suited for the big screen. For me Tom Hardy stood out with Cumberbatch also very competent. Hurt was playing himself as usual, the rest were not that noteworthy except for Kathy Burke's small role which was excellent. It did capture the mood and drabness of the seventies very well and the cinematography was faultless; look out for an Oscar or BAFTA in that category.

Unlike many here, I did not feel this was a classic. The narrative was chopped about too much. Unless you know the book well you could be forgiven for some confusion. There was no atmosphere of menace or enigma portrayed at Thornfield; when Jane first arrived it should build slowly;other bad errors: where was the presence of Grace Pool? Terrible mistake with the fire, it was his canopy bed, not the curtains and Jane threw water on him. Too much was cut out, even allowing for time poignant scenes from Lowood, and also with the Reeds, they were not there. The trouble is that the Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephen's version surpasses all and much longer because it was serialized. I urge those of you interested, to read the book, and understand that this version was not strong. Good acting but weak narrative. I was disappointed because like so many I love the story. Apart from a better Rochester,(Fassbender) this is no better than the Franco Zeffirelli version. I thought the young Jane was weak and rather miscast and easily forgotten.

I rarely give ten but this film is one of the best that I am ever likely to see. So much praise already so I only have this to say.It shows how very foolish are the members of the Academy for not lavishing this movie with a batch of Oscars. Thecast were so well balanced. Julie Ormond was perfect in this role,sadly we don't see much of her now. She has a fragility on the screen which other actresses don't have. A young Brad Pitt is a revelation in this film and as always Aidan Quinn totally reliable. Hopkins is perfectly cast as the gruff father who adores his sons but cannot hold onto his wife. The total futility of war is more than proved in this movie. It is Samuel who sets off a terrible chain of events by going to fight the Hun ( as they were referred to). A once loving family are torn to pieces and the dreadful irony was that it all could have been prevented. Suzanna loved Samuel but Tristan sent her wild and poor Alfred the serious older brother who adores her also, has to wait patiently in the background. The real tragedy is Susanna's infertility juxtaposed with Isabel Twos fertility. The narration of One Stab was a masterstroke, especially as he never spoke English when addressing the characters. A great story that is very easy on the eye with wonderful cinematography. Look out for the 1080p blu-ray version.

Having seen the real Bob Champion interviewed on the BBc this year at Aintree I was reminded of just how much the guy has done to raise money for cancer. The film for its genre is excellent;it was great that they used the real Aldaniti. So okay, there are a few minor flaws and Edward Woodward as John Gifford and also Peter Barkworth as Nick Embiricos are a bit wooden and capable of far better but it is the overall impression that the film makes which should stir the audience. John Hurt is very good as Champion and I think that the portrayal of the savage chemotherapy on him is very realistic. If you are knowledgeable about horses and racing you will spot many continuity mistakes but that is nit-picking. The horse racing scenes are well directed and filmed on location. The rupture of Aldaniti's tendon was as potentially serious as any horse injury can be therefore his come-back is quite remarkable. I think the real protagonists involved with his recovery must have had input in the film.I doubt if ever they would have considered to put- down such a lovely horse. the film has a theme of tenacity and hope and is worth seeing for that reason alone.

Simply the best film of its genre that I have ever seen and am ever likely to see:the score, the cinematography, the acting, the theme, the narrative and the humour it has the lot! Without a doubt my favourite film - EVER. It is a complete traversty that it is not in top 250. With the recent death of John Barry who composed the score I am reminded to watch it again, but the extended version this time. What a pity that the longer version is not yet available on Blu-ray. Worthy of all awards it received.To say Costner could not act is nonsense, he is excellent in this role and his direction par excellence. They say that the Western is dead but when films of this quality are made there will always be a great audience. Costner is a fine director and therefore it's a pity that he wasted his time on inferior films.

I viewed Black Swan with women only, all of whom did not like it. They found it offensive, disturbing and not as good as they had hoped. Many critics on IMDb have already found the flaws in the film so I shall not repeat. Portman is a little one dimensional. She is so uptight as the actress never mind her character. I found Nina Sayers irritating and could not sympathize with her. Winona Ryder should have had more screen time as the role of Beth was perfect for her. There is so much which is implausible about the film that the good bits such as art direction, music and atmosphere are somewhat lost. I really wanted to like this film as from the trailers I inferred that it would be top notch - not so. Rather disappointing as I felt something was truly missing and it never jumped out at me. The bad script did not help, it was more than bad it was appalling. Was it horror? Was it thriller? Was it just the story of a repressed girl who was totally unsuitable to be a ballerina? Come the Oscars, I think Jennifer Lawrence from Winter's Bone would be a worthier winner. Portman is a fine actress but was unable to quite deliver in the role; simply put she was too uptight. Judging by so many other negative reviews the film has not lived up to its hyperbole.