Is it well-acted? Yes. Is it well-played? Yes. Is it representative of real life? No. It is hollyweird's idea of what middle-class life is because they do not experience it. The movie is cynical and more like science-fiction than drama. But, it is engrossing and well-acted. Ang Lee is the king of depressing cynicism. The movie is highly voyeuristic and cannibalistic in its view of everyday life. But, I cannot fault the intention -- it accomplishes what it sets out to accomplish. So, in that context, it is excellently portrayed. However, only watch it if you have a fatalistic view of your neighbors. The comparisons to "American Beauty" have some credence but "Ice Storm" lacks a sense of humor about itself. This is a movie mistake -- wherein the director takes the material too seriously as if it were an ultimate truth. Good movie, bad taste in the mouth.
Reviews
4 Reviews
In the Electric Mist
(2009)
Tommy Lee nails the part
8 March 2009
Tommy Lee Jones has either read Burke's books or he is really that good. Unlike Alec Baldwin's Robicheaux in "Heaven's Prisoners" Jones has the complex nature of Robicheaux's personality down. Jones can deliver on the character's contrasting moods -- the sensitivity of his care for others versus the fire of his smoldering anger. Good flick. No stupid CGI tricks, no political correctness, just a good old fashioned crime mystery with a very riveting main character. There are some unresolved elements regarding the Goodman and Beatty parts but the dogged pursuit of the criminal element by Jones is worth the price of admission. I've read all of Burke's books and this is as close as anyone is going to get to myriad aspects of Dave Robicheaux's tortured soul. Burke fans disappointed by "Heaven's Prisoners" should see this one.
The Da Vinci Code
(2006)
Works as a Thriller but not as a mystery
21 May 2006
Acting was, of course, considering the cast, excellent. It was thrilling and exciting and well photographed. It was fun to watch. Good movie.
As a mystery, it falls apart. And as history it is chock full of false information -- but, it must be remembered that the book and the movie are fiction, not fact. And, I think the majority realize this and I kept that in mind when I watched the movie and enjoyed it.
The characters depicted are supposed to be highly intelligent yet they make tortured intuitive leaps which weren't logical. There are almost too many to list. The obvious ones are 1.) Even if Mary Magdelene was married to Jesus, how does that make her divine and how does that affect Christ's divinity? Mary's divine and Jesus isn't? If Jesus was married, so what? 2.) The "Sang Real" is a huge, gigantic secret, yet at every turn in the movie it seems that everyone in the film knows about it. Ever try to keep a secret with just one or two people? Why wasn't this 'secret' widely known after centuries of so many people knowing it. And going around killing off the bloodline doesn't wash. 3.) The protectors of the "Sang Real" (Priory of Sion or whatever) show up at the end to "Protect Sophie . . . 'as we always have'". So, where in the heck were they throughout the movie? 4.) So what if Leonardo Da Vinci painted a picture with a woman in it or left a chalice out? It's not relevant. He wasn't at the last supper. How does that support a conclusion that Jesus was married? It doesn't. How could highly-intelligent people make these illogical conclusions? Historically, the council of Nicea did NOT meet to throw away gospels. They met to decide whether to enter 2 Peter and some other new Testament books into canon that had already been widely accepted by the first church. The gospel mentioned in "The Da Vinci Code" was written a few hundred years after Christ's resurrection whereas the canonical gospels were written within a generation of Christ, from eye-witness accounts, and were already widely accepted by the first Church.
The council of Nicea met to debate only one huge question -- Christ's divinity. 1. Was Christ pre-eminently divine and therefore the Son of God and God Himself OR 2. Was Christ appointed by God to be His son after His resurrection. The vote at Nicea was decidedly one-sided -- only two votes out of approximately 300 were cast for the second premise. It was by a landslide vote that the council adopted the biblical view that Christ was pre-eminent, that Jesus Christ was not a created being but the son of God and finally that Christ was God incarnate.
Good movie, bad history. Conclusion: A fine thriller that doesn't pass the smell test for logic yet enjoyable to watch.
As a mystery, it falls apart. And as history it is chock full of false information -- but, it must be remembered that the book and the movie are fiction, not fact. And, I think the majority realize this and I kept that in mind when I watched the movie and enjoyed it.
The characters depicted are supposed to be highly intelligent yet they make tortured intuitive leaps which weren't logical. There are almost too many to list. The obvious ones are 1.) Even if Mary Magdelene was married to Jesus, how does that make her divine and how does that affect Christ's divinity? Mary's divine and Jesus isn't? If Jesus was married, so what? 2.) The "Sang Real" is a huge, gigantic secret, yet at every turn in the movie it seems that everyone in the film knows about it. Ever try to keep a secret with just one or two people? Why wasn't this 'secret' widely known after centuries of so many people knowing it. And going around killing off the bloodline doesn't wash. 3.) The protectors of the "Sang Real" (Priory of Sion or whatever) show up at the end to "Protect Sophie . . . 'as we always have'". So, where in the heck were they throughout the movie? 4.) So what if Leonardo Da Vinci painted a picture with a woman in it or left a chalice out? It's not relevant. He wasn't at the last supper. How does that support a conclusion that Jesus was married? It doesn't. How could highly-intelligent people make these illogical conclusions? Historically, the council of Nicea did NOT meet to throw away gospels. They met to decide whether to enter 2 Peter and some other new Testament books into canon that had already been widely accepted by the first church. The gospel mentioned in "The Da Vinci Code" was written a few hundred years after Christ's resurrection whereas the canonical gospels were written within a generation of Christ, from eye-witness accounts, and were already widely accepted by the first Church.
The council of Nicea met to debate only one huge question -- Christ's divinity. 1. Was Christ pre-eminently divine and therefore the Son of God and God Himself OR 2. Was Christ appointed by God to be His son after His resurrection. The vote at Nicea was decidedly one-sided -- only two votes out of approximately 300 were cast for the second premise. It was by a landslide vote that the council adopted the biblical view that Christ was pre-eminent, that Jesus Christ was not a created being but the son of God and finally that Christ was God incarnate.
Good movie, bad history. Conclusion: A fine thriller that doesn't pass the smell test for logic yet enjoyable to watch.
It's All About Love
(2003)
Incoherent, incomprehensible . . .
8 December 2005
or to paraphrase Mark Twain, "The mere absence of this movie is a good start on a video library." Director Thomas Vinterberg said the hell with motivation, purpose, and story and somehow decided to make a movie that rivals hemmorrhoid surgery. One waits expectantly, almost pathetically, for something in the movie to explain anything that happens but nothing ever does.
It is a most painful and tedious exercise to watch this. Vinterberg commits the sin of being boring and pretentious and then compounds his iniquity by torturing the viewer en route to the clichéd ending.
It is perhaps, an attempt to be avant-garde, yet it succeeds only in being an immensely impotent film. Ugandans float off, people lie dead in the streets and malls, people are cloned (for God knows what reason) but none of it seems connected nor does the director bore us with explanation -- rather he allows his creation to do the job.
All copies of this DVD should be buried so the stench doesn't rise up to annoy another generation. Absolutely the worst film I've seen in 20 years. Avoid this horrible waste of two hours of your life. You're better off contemplating your garbage disposal. At least it performs a useful function.
I consider this a public service to warn people regarding this tripe. You've been warned.
It is a most painful and tedious exercise to watch this. Vinterberg commits the sin of being boring and pretentious and then compounds his iniquity by torturing the viewer en route to the clichéd ending.
It is perhaps, an attempt to be avant-garde, yet it succeeds only in being an immensely impotent film. Ugandans float off, people lie dead in the streets and malls, people are cloned (for God knows what reason) but none of it seems connected nor does the director bore us with explanation -- rather he allows his creation to do the job.
All copies of this DVD should be buried so the stench doesn't rise up to annoy another generation. Absolutely the worst film I've seen in 20 years. Avoid this horrible waste of two hours of your life. You're better off contemplating your garbage disposal. At least it performs a useful function.
I consider this a public service to warn people regarding this tripe. You've been warned.
Tell Your Friends