Benutzerrezensionen

"Septembers of Shiraz" is a well made and very well acted film...but I cannot see many people wanting to see it for several obvious reasons. First, it's about the Iranian Revolution of 1979 and a lot of people just don't find this a 'sexy' subject for films. Second, no matter how how do such a film, people will find fault in how the Revolution is handled. Third, and most importantly, the film is incredibly unpleasant with scenes of torture...and a lot of folks don't want to watch someone being tortured. All these conspire to make this a difficult film to say the least.

The film begins as the Revolution is beginning. No context whatsoever is given to the viewer--nothing about the previous brutal regime of the Shah nor about the ideology of the Ayatollah and his followers. All you really learn is that the Shah was awful and the people who followed were awful. I know more about it because I am a retired history teacher...but the average viewer, particularly younger ones, will feel a bit confused. I think the reason they did this related to the second problem above...and so they apparently tried to make the film as apolitical and a personal film as they could instead.

The story is about a Jewish family and their particular experiences during this time. The husband, Isaac (Adrien Brody), is arrested...though you never learn exactly why. It seems as if he was arrested simply because he was rich and he undergoes both mental and physical torture from the new Republican Guard. During this time, his wife (Salma Hayek) waits and waits and watches everything they owned get stolen from thieves...all in the name of the Revolution. Will the husband be released and what of the family?

I noticed some folks complained about this film because the look wasn't just right--such as the wrong sorts of cars being shown in Iranian roads. Well...considering it was NOT filmed in Iran, and I STRONGLY DOUBT the government would have allowed this, this sort of complaint seems bizarre at best. The film was made in Bulgaria...and I guess they tried their best. I'll say no more about this.

Overall, the film is very well made and compelling...and unpleasant. Because it is a story about a real family, however, I cannot just dismiss it. It's worth seeing IF you are up to the task.

This movie may have hit the snag mostly because the novel is very well written and the movie is kind of an abysmal adaptation of it.. but the story is quite enthralling, story revolves around a Jewish Iranian family and its struggle and escape from it during late 1970s as Iran sees the rise of Islamic fundamentalists ...

Didn't think too much of it at first. But then I read some of the few reviews in here and elsewhere, and everything started to sound fishy. It ain't _that_ bad. Sure you can tell stories about the impact of religious mass hysterical envy on an entire country, suffered by decent people just because they dare to have made a bit of money under the old regime. So the Shah wasn't a bloody angel either, but you don't fight fire by pissing gasoline on the fire. In fact you should tell such stories, as this flick clearly shows. Not that I didn't already know that Ayatollah Iran is no different in hysteria from a communist regime, but this one confirms it again.

This flick suddenly became important tell just on that alone. Somebody here isn't from Estonia. Or from Bulgaria. I guess some people just aren't accustomed to their selfish oppression of decent folk having a better life than themselves being called out in international movies. It's a bitch being on the wrong side of history too, innit, fana? (Lot of that going 'round in the world these days.)

What annoys me the most is that the voices of the cast is recorded, and that was disturbing, It could've been best, you have a great cast, a great story but a bad annouing result.

This film is set in 1979 during the Iranian Revolution and focuses on the experience of a wealthy Jewish family whose patriarch (Brody) is suddenly arrested by the Republican Guard and how they handle the repercussions of this revolution and it's threat to their household. Although the story and acting are good there are several flaws with this movie. If you don't know the history you will be a bit lost because no context is given to understand that the previous Persian Shah who's monarchy had reigned 2,500 years and which tolerated the practice of many religions was overthrown by the supporters of the revolutionary founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini, who the poor felt was the answer to their prayers. The directing could have been better, the sets and cinematography were average, and the pacing is a bit slow but, this "based on true events" story draws you in and the acting keeps it afloat which makes this worth the watch, In My Humble Opinion. Aug2020

A page from Iran and the tragedy suffered by its citizens under a religious totalitarian state. Adrien Brody does a good job of acting.

If you are old enough to remember the brutal history of the deposing of the Shah of Iran, this movie provides a small slice of the life during this takeover. The conversion to theocracy in Iran led to draconian measures placed on its citizens and to opportunists of the supporters of the regime to enjoy personal triumph at the cost of those who had been successful in their own lives. We should not forget that Ayatollah Khomeini was the new "god" and had usurped the Shah. His ideals were not unlike a fundamentalist Taliban ideology. The demand to follow the koran and force the end of Iranian "westernization" was foremost the demand of the new regime. The fact that our protagonist is a Jewish jeweler with considerable success under the Shah led to jealous behaviour on the part of the new guard. It also portrays some heroic moments by honest Irani citizens as they help the forsaken jewller.

The movie was well made and well acted. It has a very good script and that fact alone makes for a good movie. It has thrills, tension, and suspense. It is emotional as anyone watching the movie will recognize the brutality against fellow humans and remind people to be wary of dictatorships be they a Shah or a religious figure. Hatred is hatred by anyone. The movie provides a better insight into the current Iran.

Watch the movie if not for the history lesson, then because it is a good movie. Above standard at any measure.

This is a very emotional movie, but it would have been much better if the main character wasn't a Jew, since all wealthy and successful people were a target at the time. It is too much of a cliche.

Greetings again from the darkness. It's 1979 in Tehran, and the Shah of Iran has recently been overthrown in favor of Ayatollah Khomeini and the shift to fundamentalist Islam. Director Wayne Blair informs us that the Hanna Weg script from Dalia Sofer's bestselling novel is "based on true events". As soon as we realize the story is about a wealthy Jewish family, we are prepared for the sure to be unpleasantness.

Adrien Brody plays Isaac, a self-made man whose jewelry business has profited through his dealings with the previous regime. His wife Farnez is played by Salma Hayek, and their beautiful home is the setting for the going-away party for their son who is headed to the United States to continue his education, leaving behind his parents and younger sister.

Ignoring his own warnings that things are getting bad, Isaac is soon arrested by the Revolutionary Guard. As Farnez tries to see him, while also keeping things together at home, Isaac is being interrogated and later tortured as he is held captive.

As in many revolutions, it comes down to rich versus poor, and those who had power versus those who now wield the big stick. Isaac and Farnez are presented as good people who have helped others … including their housekeeper played by the always interesting Shohreh Aghdashloo (House of Sand and Fog). Her loyalties begin to waver even as her son joins forces with the Guards. Why should she clean toilets while Farnez lives the high life? The scenes with Ms. Hayek and Ms. Aghdashloo are the film's best, but even those aren't strong enough given the material.

The film tries to maintain a neutral stance on religion and politics, though it's clear where the sympathies fall. The ending dedication to "all victims of persecution" gives some idea of the lack of focus here. The over-acting from Adrian Brody does distract some from the manner in which the story ends. The lesson seems to be that one is never free when focused on material things, and yet revolutions always seem to be about the power that comes with money … rather than the issues initially proclaimed. In book form, this is a terrific and personal story about the impact of the revolution. Unfortunately, on the screen, it comes across as all too familiar and lacking in danger and suspense … none of which lessens the true hardships faced by this family.

I find this movies exhilarating , emotional and in the mean time extremely sad, as always Adrian Brody hits his target. I am an Iranian so I can make a perfect connection to this story, it is a tale of exile and forced migration, I had to go through a less severe version of exile myself.

After the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the poor and illiterate that were empowered by the Islamists and mullahs have been given a power to loot, abuse and murder those in minorities,wealthy individuals and those who supported the previous regime. the story still continues till today. illiterate,bigoted Muslim thugs with beards still kidnap , murder, blackmail and ransack as they please. Mullahs still hold power in 21st century and Sharia law is the law of the land.

It is very hard for me or any Iranian who lived before the revolution to even imagine the ciaos brought upon us by these Islamic vermin. I even noticed some of the regime apologist have lowered the rating here in IMDb screaming murder and demanding justice.

This film is incredibly close to really, there was no propaganda involved and even today the same is happening in Iran, when country is taken over by a fascist religious ideology these kind of behaviors are normal. What is abnormal are the regime apologists residing in the west and still defending the undeniable.

The story begins when a prosperous Jewish family living in North Tehran faced with horrors, a self-made business man with his family watches as his country being tore apart by fascist religious bigots. being Jewish and wealthy, his business is ransacked by his own employees and he was arrested for being in touch with Royal Family of Iran, His wife and child are being abused and constantly taunted by the notorious IRGC members.on other side his wife and child waiting for hi at home are being faced with a class indifference and illiterate lower class demanding their rights.

Watching this movie is incredibility put you in touch with revolutionary Iran, it worth every second and it is an incredible accurate of what really happened.

I watched this movie on Netflix Canada where it was called "Enemy Territory." Set in Tehran in 1979 about eight months after the Iranian Revolution that overthrew the Shah and brought Ayatollah Khomeini to power, the movie basically tells the story of one affluent Jewish family living in the city and trying to navigate their way through the chaotic times.

Adiren Brody played Isaac, husband to Farnez (Salma Hayak) and father to Parviz and Shirin. Isaac is a successful jeweller who stays out of politics and looks after his business, treating his Muslim employees well. The biggest mark against him is that he regularly travels to Israel to visit family. As the movie opens, the family is happy and successful and celebrating Parviz' opportunity to go to school in the United States. All seems well, even in the aftermath of the revolution. But suddenly Isaac is arrested, and the family finds itself living in a nightmare. Confined to a prison, Issac is questioned and tortured in an attempt to get information from him. Most of the torture was not especially graphic, but there was one unsettling scene in which Isaac is tied and beaten. His wife and young daughter aren't given much information about where he is, and for a time don't know if he's alive or dead. You feel for the family's plight, and you hope for their eventual escape, but for me Isaac's story and the family's troubles were secondary. I found this movie more interesting for offering a few different takes on what the Revolution was all about.

To be honest, the religious aspect of the Iranian Revolution wasn't much depicted. But I found three competing narratives that told the Revolution's story. There were those who honestly saw the Revolution as an attempt to right social injustices and to free Iran from foreign domination. Much of this was seen through Habibeh (Shohreh Aghdashloo) - who worked for the family but who was also a friend to them, but who was increasingly aware of the discrepancy between the two. As she noted once, in all the years she had worked for them she had never been asked to share a meal with them. Watching her struggle within herself about the meaning of the Revolution was interesting, and Aghdashloo did a good job of portraying that internal struggle. Then there was Habibeh's son Morteza (Navid Navid.) Essentially he and his cohorts are the thugs who appear in every revolution (or even just protest) and use the events as an opportunity to wreak havoc. Morteza steals everything from Isaac, in spite oft he fact that Isaac had been very good to him. And there's Mohsen (Alon Aboutboul) - in charge of the prison where Isaac is held. His character makes the point out that even revolutionaries are for sale. Once Isaac arranges to give him a lot of money (donated to the revolution, of course) Mohsen suddenly arranges for Isaac's release and gains him and his family safe travel out of the country. None of that is earth-shattering, but I thought it was a well done portrayal of the multi-faceted motivations behind a revolution.

I can't say this was a particularly exciting story. There is some drama toward the end as the family approaches Turkey, and it isn't at all clear that they'll make their escape, but beyond that it's a relatively straightforward movie. Isaac gets arrested; Isaac gets tortured; Isaac gets released; Isaac flees with his family. It's not complicated. But somehow I did like the portrayal of the Revolution. (7/10)

It's the 1970's & the Iranian revolution is well underway - look out those who prospered under the old regime as the 'new' is coming after you. This is the time writer Dalia Sofer is documenting - the need to escape at all costs. Many good performances bring this powerful recreation to life but, it's obvious from the mixed reviews not many people cared much for the story being told in this screenplay. Is it the fault of the screenplay or other? It's certainly a graphic image of a tumultuous time.

It's difficult to understand why the producer's of this quite major work, opted for the chosen style. If you have a dramatic real-life story to convey and a top cast to carry it, then why treat it to such a cheap photographic style? Australian director Wayne Blair, along with Australian cinematographer Warwick Thornton, have approached this project as if it were a low budget backyard movie. It features some of the worst hand-held camera work I've seen - at one stage it looked as if they were shooting during an earth tremor. At our screening, someone actually said the unstable images were making them nauseous. I'm wondering if this reflects on the Australian Film and Television School's idiom of over-the-top Political Correctness - as in the 'Identity Politics' currently being played out, that foolishly causes 'them and us' separationist type rifts? IE: 'here we have two aboriginals taking courses, must give them top marks for the world to see our ethos'. But, seems perhaps the rest of the world may not have shared our 'enthusiasm'.

Whatever it was/is this movie did not deserve to do so badly on the world stage. It offers a harsh reflection of the state of life at this challenging time – and, as it sadly remains! Mark Isham's music is effective and the use of a 2 Cellos track is well chosen. Overall, it's not as bad as some others have claimed – but with what seems like some 'tacked-on' scenes, should have been better.

It's a bad time for Brody to be Jewish in Iran - and when he's abducted by those taking power, he's gotta fight to survive.

The only truth is that the movie is mediocre at best, regardless of the propaganda aspect. It's overwhelmingly one sided in substance and disappointing to watch, since it actually distorts the cause of certain historical events which took place. It tries too hard to focus on a single side effect of the revolution, and at a certain point, it becomes insulting to ones intelligence regardless of political views. Obviously, the reason is that it doesn't want to exposed any other detail about grievances a whole people might have had, as would be the case in any revolution. It claims to be based on true events, but those events are manipulated and exaggerated to such a degree that you walk away hating a whole people, not knowing really why... and not learning anything new.

Enjoyed this historical film about Iran being torn apart for it's oil. Iranians citizens did not benefit from their own oil & lived poorly. Wealthy foreigners were targeted by the revolution & robbed. A beautiful country destroyed by greed vs fundamentalism.

I am actually shocked at how bad the acting is in this film - I can't figure if it's the screenplay or the actual acting that slows the pace down considerably. I have read the book, which was an exhilarating read but nothing special, and being Iranian I could relate and understand the story within the context.

My main issues with the film is that it comes across very insincere because it is spoken in English, phrases which would sound beautiful and more powerful in the native Persian, sound dramatic and silly, which detract from the film's earnestness. I understand if the director wants to reach an English - speaking audience, but as a British - Iranian watching non - Iranian actors speak with such a horrific Iranian accents that metamorphosis into Russian for some reason, is horrific. It is simply not credible.

Naturally, Shohreh Aghdashloo's acting is impeccable as always - if anything she should have been chosen for the lead role instead of Salma.

I would recommend the film 'The Stoning of Soraya M' if you'd like to better understand the social context following the Iranian Revolution of 1979.

Awful director and low quality Movie Location is like afganistan Not Iran.

I liked this movie a lot. Its realistic portrait showing true nature of 1979 revolutionaries is not something we can see a lot in movies. Adrien Brody's acting is also impressive.

Good movie!

This was a film I was looking forward to seeing. It is about a Jewish businessman – Isaac (Adrien Brody) who is a successful jeweller. He is married to the wonderful Farnez – Selma Hayek in late 1970's Iran. We get some scene setting but not a lot about the toppling of the Shah and very little about Ayatollah Khomeini; just that The Revolutionary Guard have taken over .

Then the Guard come calling and Isaac is arrested and their whole World goes south in a very bad way. Now this is not a true story it is based on real events and those events are portrayed in a seemingly black and white way that supporters of the Ayatollah will see as very one sided. There is an attempt to balance the books but it sort of lacks credibility. Some of the scenes too were a bit of a stretch – but to say any of the detail could be a plot reveal – which I do not want to do.

The acting is all very good, but there is some unfortunate CGI, blue screen and the period detail is all wrong. They do not have a single Hillman Hunter on the street shots and at the time 90% of all cars were Hunters, they even assembled them there. The action is also very lame and the actions of some of the players lacked all credulity, it was almost sanitised as I remember all too well the carnage that was shown on our screens at the time. It would have been nice to have had a better portrayal of what actually took place to a country that was at a cross roads in its history and some could say is still paying the price today.

I liked the movie. In terms of screenplay, it deserves not more than 6/10. However, the story-line and acting are worth of watching it, and the point is something that every human has to be aware of. In any country, in any religion, on each continent...the social-economical moment creates the sad reality. Religion is a tool in hands of frustrated, who, during the time, have realized its power and now are using it to the fullest. Somebody needs to be blamed for their own socially poor lives, complexes and failed childhood. Unfortunately, not the ones who are to be blamed, mostly their parents, but innocent people that have nothing to do with their lives. My high grade is to make the balance. The movie deserves more that it got so far. Too many religiously colored grades I guess. This movie is not a propaganda. It's reality. People around world still get jailed or executed just for telling their opinion about religions, or abused / murdered based on their nationality / skin color/ religion. This has to stop if we want a good world for our children. Politicians have to start talking what they really think instead of what's the best for their popularity. Intelligent people must not be silent and let only the other ones to speak. Medias must start caring about the ethics instead of profits. People must turn to their families instead of abstractedly and idolatry. Life is not what media or other people tell you. Life is your family. Dedicate to it!