A brilliant if difficult fiilm
598256
A flawed masterpiece from Angelopoulos, the first of a number of great
films of his you can pick at if you want.  It's tragic that one of the best
modern film-makers is virtually unknown here in the U.S., and that
so few of his films are currently available.

First and foremost, 'The Traveling Players' is a technical achievement;
almost 4 hours long and only about 80 cuts in the whole film! It goes
against all we've gotten used to in film story-telling, and does it brilliantly.

The story follows a troupe of actors back and forth through the years
1939 to 1952. They're thrown about by the violent, sometimes absurd
tides of Greek history, with victory over the Nazi's giving way to the
rise of local fascists at home.

The film is very Brechtian and distanced in style. We hardly get to
know the characters at all, despite the running time. It's much more
interested in the great tides of politics and time than individuals -
which is both its strength and its weakness. I was always interested,
sometimes horrified, but rarely touched emotionally. Also, some of the
good/bad of the politics felt simplistic.

That said, despite its length, I will re-watch it. I suspect I'll
appreciate the amazing scope of it's vision and the bravery of it's
style even more without expecting to get caught up in the people in a
conventional way.

If you have the chance, get ahold of the 'New Star' DVD, which was only
in release a short time.  The transfer was supervised and approved by
Angelopoulos, and certainly looks wildly better than the commonly found VHS
tape.

Update:  Artificial Eye has released a series of box sets of Angelopoulos' films
in the UK.  They can be found on Amazon.uk.  These are region 2, so you'd
need a region free player.  The qualityis very high.  I compared "The Traveling Players"
in the set, with the New Star release and they were nearly identical in image quality.
Perhaps the New Star had a tiny edge, to my taste in the color arena. The New Star is
just slightly cooler in tone, faces are less ruddy.  But the image is so similar I imagine
they could easily have come from the same master, and who can say which
colors would be closer to the original intent.

There's a bigger difference in sound.  The New Star has a 5.1 dolby re-mix
which I found slightly cleaner and more appealing than the Artificial Eye's
simple dolby stereo.  But one could make a good argument that the original
film wasn't mixed in 5.1, so the stereo mix is more true to the original.
3282574
This film is a very intriguing and zealous search of a German officer, by a young journalists who learns of a terrible secret, after having read a diary of a suicide of Jewish origin.

Once he is aware about that terrible reality, he will make the best he can to avoid by all his means, the eventual proliferation of this underground Neo Nazi survivals who pretend to revive old glories.

But the way the script is exposed with a very long exposition of the dramatic core, weakens it dangerously, but the engaging presence of John Voight (with a very convincing German accent 9 and the unforgettable final confrontation between him and Maximilian Schell makes the film shines with refulgent intensity in the climax sequence.

Instead Ronald Neame I would have bet for two very promising directors by then : John Borman or the prominent director Arthur Penn
984786
The film beautifully captures the struggle many older parents have trying to keep the connection to their no-longer little children.  It's an almost universal issue but few films have ever covered this heart aching subject so well.  I watched it a second time and liked it even more in the second viewing.  The best De Niro has been in years...and I think he is always pretty darn good.  This film deserved more recognition than I recall it getting.  I don't think that its title helped.  It's a beautifully nuanced film that is in the same league as films like "Terms of Endearment".
3689003
Making films based on actual persons' lives, particularly about someone as fragile and self-destructive as Sylvia Plath, is often extremely difficult. For starters, the viewer often knows the story line. Anyone who knows the name Sylvia Plath is aware that she committed suicide so there are few surprises for the audience. What this movie does so well is make the downward spiraling of Plath interesting without stooping to cheap sentiment or sensationalism. Much of the credit for this film's success must go to Gwyneth Paltrow who is quite mesmerizing as the tragic poet. She literally becomes Sylvia Plath. Conventional wisdom is that Ted Hughes, played here by Daniel Craig, was basically a cad and treated Plath badly. That may in fact be true, but this film portays him as someone who for a long time worked hard to save a relationship that was doomed from the beginning. In her increasing paranoia, Plath accused him of having affairs with almost everyone he met, practically driving him into the arms of other women-- at least according to this film version.

Certainly these two extremely talented poets join the ranks of other famous couples who though passionately in love cannot live together. One of the best films of 2004, SYLVIA is not to be missed.
613843
A lonely man, terribly disappointed since his last amorous failure, decides to make a long and complicated journey to win the favor of a young lady who could be his own daughter. She will blackmail her and the pact is to spent a week with him.

The smart script is enriched with bitter and caustic dialogues; scented with that discrete charm where you immediately tie up with Vladimir Nabokov ` s Lolita. If you notice carefully the amazing resembling between Sinead Cussack and Sue Lyon you will coincide with me. It's an intimate chamber work that depicts three fundamental characters: the man in question, our candide girl and her naive boyfriend.  A clever and modern fable that shows us nobody is absolutely out of game in what love concerns. When you have talent, imagination and good taste the door is open.

A mature film that will let you thinking for a long, long time.
1893674
Even someone with no Chinese like me can get the symbolism and follow the story to a degree in this beautifully acted tragedy, but the technical problems with the DVD pointed out by the other reviewers made this a frustrating experience for me. The story was brilliant as it followed the tragedy of women in a very patriarchal setting, showing that even when they can find "success" on some level, they are trapped in a cycle (a lake of lost souls). Another review commented quite nicely on this aspect, but the film also reveals that the men are trapped as well. In this particular story they all happen to be drunk, cheating or literally retarded so this would appeal widely to western (feminist-oriented) audiences if they could fix the technical issues. The enigmatic "Japanese" who shows up to ink the big deal that enriches the main character is something of a feminist icon as well, revealing halfway through the film that she does in fact understand Chinese, but she has somehow escaped the brutal cycle of life for women in China. She is able to have a lover and come and go as she pleases but she has no family. The choice seems clear, perpetuate the cycle and inflict misery on some innocent youngsters or make some kind of escape and avoid having a family at all. This might be a very western interpretation, but I think it is essentially the westernized feminist dilemma. The film is well made and the story is brilliantly revealed on many levels. I would give it 4.5 stars if not for the technical problems.
376546
Pan's Labyrinth is one of those films that starts so well that you hope it will stay that good but which actually surprises you and constantly improves. It's a remarkably layered work about the importance of choice even in an emotional and political dictatorship and about the fictions and fantasies that sustain people through the worst circumstances. On the surface this appears to be little more than a more fantastic spin on The Spirit of the Beehive, sharing its post-Spanish Civil War setting as well as the broken family setting, but this is a far superior film in every way. Although marketed largely as a fantasy, its real power lies in the scenes set in the real world where Sergi Lopez's all too believable Fascist monster is mopping up the few remaining communist guerrillas in the hills while waiting for his sick wife to give birth to his son while her daughter from her first marriage tries to reassert her own identity rather than submit to the Captain's idea of family.

The challenges of the mythical world are far less disturbing - or violent - than the real one, and it's all too easy to see why she wants to escape into the darkness of the labyrinth where at least the hope of something better exists. But then she's not the only one escaping into the imagination, as her mother sustains herself with a romanticised view of her meeting the captain that he has no interest in whatsoever. To him stories - even a part of his family history that has passed into local legend - exist only to be denied. Lopez's greatest sin isn't the pride that he admits to, or even that he is so pitiless, it's that he chooses to obey without question: the girl's small triumph is that she does not. And the triumphs in the film are generally small, quiet ones, where courage and fear go hand in hand, making the few acts of decency all the more important when they occur. There is one "saved by the cavalry" moment that at first doesn't convince but does prove to be there for a definite purpose that makes the ending all the more powerful.

But while there's a lot going on underneath the surface of the film, it doesn't crush it with the weight of its ideas. It's directed with a visual assurance and, at times, playfulness that sweeps you along, sometimes with delight, sometimes with apprehension, but never simply for the sake of a nice shot or a neat special effect (most of which are incredibly well integrated for such a low budget feature). The performances are superb, with Lopez somehow managing to avoid turning his irredeemable character into a caricature: this is an evil without conscience that is all too recognisable. Javier Navarette's beautiful score is also adept at walking the fine line between magic and emotion without crossing the line into schmaltz.

It's a remarkable film, the only new one that I saw last year that I'd genuinely say is one of the greatest of all time. Practically perfect and definitely one to add to your collection.
4303848
BARRY LYNDON moves at a natural pace in telling the life story of a clever, charming Irish rogue who is brilliantly played by Ryan O'Neal. The story captures 18th-century Europe in elegant yet realistic fashion and is gripping from start to finish, incorporating both tense action and well-earned emotional impact. I've noticed a consensus among many critics that this film is overly long and ponderous in places; granted, there's three hours of it, but otherwise, I just don't know where these folks are coming from. While BARRY LYNDON is not one of Thackeray's better novels, the film version is one of those rare instances where Hollywood beats a classic author at his own game. This film feeds its audience a huge slice of human comedy/tragedy without ever being preachy or forced in any way.

BARRY LYNDON was my official "favorite film" for many years before I stopped playing the "favorite" game, and to this day, I can think of few works that match it in terms of simple fineness.
548544
Absolutely stunning film. The performances by Tilda Swinton and Tom Hiddleston are award-worthy and quite moving. I adore this director (his 'Dead Man' remains one of the best anti-Westerns I've ever seen), and he does not disappoint with this one. However, if you're looking for a 'Twilight'-like love story, or even Anne Rice's vampires, this is not for you. These characters are the most believable, most deeply troubled, but also most alive vampires I've seen in film form. The relationship is deep and wondrous, as is their individual pain and joy in living so long. It's the kind of film that you think about for days and want to watch again just to catch the subtle things.
2247714
Most reviews--whether they are written by professionals or amateurs--talk about how brilliantly this film is made. All of those reviews are correct. Aronofsky is one of the finest young directors alive, the performances (with the exception of Jared Leto, who is merely good) are all excellent, the audio track is chilling and the visuals in this picture are truly magnificent. Even the post-production elements--such as editing--are nearly perfect.
But I think that most reviews don't see past the brilliant filmmaking to find the glaring drawbacks of Requiem. First, these characters are two-dimensional, at best. The viewer doesn't get get a feel for their pasts (with, perhaps, the exception of Ellen Burstyn's character, who is made three dimensional by the actress, not the writer or director) or their motivations or their dreams or their wishes for life before they became addicts. That's a dangerous thing to do in any film, but especially in one like this; one that is expecting the viewer to care about the eventual tragedies these people face. One that actually requires the viewer to care in order for the feature's political statement to mean anything, to have any relevance. Did this movie overcome the character development? To a certain extent, yes it did, if only because the performances were so amazing and the technical elements of the film so flawless. Nonetheless, Requiem would have succeeded even more if these characters had been more real.
That brings me to a thematic discussion. Requiem, much like Traffic, looks into addiction, drug use and it's effects. Unlike Traffic, however, Requiem doesn't take a relatively neutral stance while doing it's best to accurately depict the drug world. Aronofsky, in fact, makes this film a resounding condemnation of drugs, as if saying that any and every person who uses drugs will eventually meet the same fate these characters do. Not that it matters, but I have persoanlly never done a drug (other than alcohol); I do know several people who use occasional substances and I only know one person who's life has been significantly negatively effected, though no where near to the same degree as these characters; most users I know are in fact quasi-users and lead perfectly normal lives. What I'm saying is this: drugs don't inevitably lead to these sorts of situations; to imply that they do--as Requiem for a Dream most certainly does--is not only excessively pessimistic, it's also a bit insulting. Setting aside any policital views, Aronofsky, would have been better served if he'd had at least one sane, occasional user who's life succeeded, than he was by having a plethora of spiralling hell-like situations for every character.
Ultimately, is this film worth viewing? Absolutely. It is a very impressive cinematic achievement, but there are still some glaring flaws that shouldn't be ignored.
2736541
`The Pianist' is one of those films that stays with you long over you've watched it.  In fact, I haven't seen the film for roughly eight years or so and yet I still remember it remarkably well.  The triumph of the human spirit and the will to survive is rarely portrayed with such earnestness and raw honesty.  In fact, there is so much heft to this film that it is almost hard to take in at times.

It's heavy, that's for sure.

Telling the story of Wladyslaw Szpilman, `The Pianist' recounts the horrors of the Holocaust with riveting action.  This true story centers on Szpilman's escape from captivity and his journey of survival and he is forced into hiding.  As he moves from one are to the next, we see those who aided in his survival by putting him up, bringing him supplies and food and yes, even those who left him to die on his own.  Some balk at the fact that Szpiman's story isn't of much importance; that he didn't accomplish anything remarkable or that this one man's story isn't impactful enough, but to them I balk at their reasoning.  This singular tale is really a universal story of triumph in the face of adversity and shows that dwelling in each and every one of us is the power and strength of overcome and prevail regardless of the perils in front of us.

Beautifully acted and directed, both Brody and Polanski earned those Oscars.  Brody is phenomenal as the tortured Szpilman.  He ages remarkably with the time, allowing the true nature of his situation to impact his every being as the film progresses.  Polanski uses the right amount of restraint, reigning in so as not to allow his film to become a saccharine mess, which it so easily could have been reduced to.  Instead, `The Pianist' becomes something so much more.  It has heart and soul but it maintains a grit that allows it to speak volumes with an honest interpretation of one of the most heartless times in human history.
2504604
"L'Homme Blesse" is a deeply affecting portrait of human loneliness and alienation that transcends its grittily realistic depiction of the French gay underworld of street hustlers and sex in dark corners. Its themes of isolation, unrequited love and the search for meaningful connections  are universal, and are displayed in this film with enormous sensitivity and power.
The main character's struggle is one that most of us have encountered; that being, loving someone who is clearly not right for us, who is trouble with a capital T, and who will eventually lead us down a dark and destructive path. But the character's gnawing hunger for affection and belonging blinds him to those simple truths. In one scene, the character, who turns street hustler and thief to please the one he loves, offers money to another man just for a kiss. His loneliness is tangible and pervades and drives the action of the film.
The ending of this film is boldly powerful and is consistent with the self-destructive road that the character is forced to take to fulfill his aching need for love. It demonstrates the very fine line between love and hate, between the need and the anger, between hope and hopelessness, and between self esteem and self loathing. Although unremittingly bleak and sad, the film is brilliantly directed and acted. It is a film that is both moving and harrowing.
2592087
What an amazing accomplishment: a rich, densely-plotted film with topical subject matter, gorgeous cinematography, propulsive editing and fine performances all around. Moreover, a film that rewards the attention of its viewers with fine details that pay off with subtlety-- not by hammering the less attentive over the head. The director trusts the careful attention of the committed movie goer rather than lower the bar for the home video viewer juggling home tasks while paying only slight attention to the television.

The payoff is a story that begins as a sketch in the vaguest of terms and comes to life over the course of its running time. It can't have been an easy task for the actors to deliver the dawning awarenesses at so many levels but as I've already said these performances are simply as good as one finds in today's features.

Rarely does a feature film satisfy with the resounding force that a novel can deliver, but this one delivers the goods. Based on the universally positive reviews and awards I was expecting a good time at the movies but my expectations were exceeded. I suspect this is one of those films that will stay with me for a while. Truly a masterful achievement, and hopefully one that will inspire other filmmakers to continue to raise the bar rather than lower it for our ADD society.
1368205
It is a revelation to see this film again after so many years. The faithfulness of the script to Nikos Kazantzakis's novel is impressive
The score is uplifting. The high-contrast, b/w cinematography is quite beautiful.  While Anthony Quinn occasionally pushes the enveelope with his exuberance, his role is offset by the brooding Alan Bates, whose eloquent performance as a man between life stages, countries, and loves is remarkable. Lila Kedrova's Oscar-winning performance is a specxial treat. The extras  are entertaining, but unnecessary.  I lobbed off a star because my copy began delaminating (the plastic layers detached from the aluminum layer) after just six months.  Two-sided DVDs (like this one) are a drag, not only because they are more difficult to handle without scratching, but because their slightly wider metal layer may stress the polycarbonate wafers around it, eventually causing the DVD  wafer to split. This film deserves better, and hopefully, Criterion Collection will take it on before long.
3755093
You will have to work to "get" this film. Attention to nuance, irony, scene composition and the ability to accept dreams as dreams, memory as faulty and people as liars, even to themselves: you need these to enjoy this great film. If you want a staightforward thriller with a neat resolution... watch something else!

This film is a brilliant character study with political overtones. The vision is cynical and bleak. I found it unsettling and mulled it over in my mind for some time. There are so many themes, but most are implicit: imperialism, racism, bourgeois complacency, betrayal, family, trust, paranoia --these are but a few of the grand themes tackled by Haneke in less than 2 hours.

If you like a film that makes you work a bit and don't mind being disturbed, even shocked, then see Cach. The pacing is slow and deliberate, but not "arty". The dialogue is crisp and intelligent; the acting, flawless. The camera is manipulated like a surgeon's scalpel (which is as it had to be, given the main plot points) and the vibe is tense and paranoid.

Not your everyday Hollywood piffle!
2365838
For most, this movie will come across as a complex tale which seems to be in disarray. For others, it is a beautiful journey artfully shot with a riveting message of personal reflection. Say what?
What not everyone will realize is that this movie is actually capturing the past life regression of many souls. To appreciate that, understand that past life regression is about recognizing and overcoming the challenges our souls have consistently faced throughout our lives (yes plural if you believe your spirit has been here before). This movie, if the viewer is keen to recognize such a thread, details the challenges faced by each incarnation of the souls focused on throughout this movie - greed, cowardice, courage, bravery, slavery, death, love, loss and so on. In some lives, you win some, and in others, you lose some.
The movie isn't shot in disarray as much as it is showing you the similarity of a situation, or challenge a character faces throughout the ages. Ie: a character may make many mistakes and commit crimes against humanity/nature in one life (or two or three), while in another, they may actually do something valiant and different from what they had done before. Watch as Tom Hanks greedily goes after a little gem, like Gollum with his precious.
So whether you take this movie as a great story packed with an insightful message (thank you Wachowski's for picking such a poignant story to capture on film), or the artful tale of a book turned to film, or just a confusing bunch of clips sewn together with a great cast, you will be in for a wild ride of make-up mastery and some cool special effects.
1774422
I was delighted to discover this film, doubly so when I realized it was based on a script written by the leading British literary critic, Terry Eagleton, and starring one of my favorite actors, Tilda Swinton. All those things may have had the effect of making it too rich to take in a single sitting. I had to stop midway, not because I was bored or unhappy with the film. It was like drinking 120 proof bourbon straight. I could take just so much at a time. Before I go on to explore that thought, I must say that Karl Johnson, a long time Jarman collaborator, was made up to be a dead ringer for all the Wittgenstein pictures we have, and his acting is a good fit to what we know about the man. Tilda Swinton was hardly recognizable, compared to her snow queen persona in the Narnia film. Her part, as Russell's paramour, is relatively small. Michael Gough was quite good as Wittgenstein's mentor, Bertrand Russell. John Quentin came across quite well as John Maynard Keynes, although I know him less well than I do Wittgenstein and Russell. Derek Jarman, for those who don't know, has a style off to the left of Ken Russell and Peter Greenaway, both of whose works I enjoy. So why was it so hard to watch it through in one sitting. I must attribute it to the fact that I know Wittgenstein's philosophy quite well, far better than 99% of the people who are inclined to watch this movie. Therefore, the script held no secrets from me, as it quoted from Wittgenstein's two major works, and used that to depict the kind of dispair Wittgenstein felt about doing philosophy, which, at its roots, he considered a study which should disappear, once we understand what it is all about. Aside from Wittgenstein and his philosophy, the primary topic of the film is his relations with Russell, Keynes, and an unknown male lover. If you know even a bit about Wittgenstein or his thought, I recommend you see the movie.  If you have little patience for "thought movies" (Woody Allen, for example) I suggest you stay away, and go see the film of a Shakespeare play instead.