POPSCENE

I wish that this film could have been better--and it could have, in many ways. First of all the acting was quite good, particularly Tamlyn Tomita whose charm and beauty make for radiant scenes. And the sets/cinematography allowed for a good deal of authenticity.

However, the difficulty I have with the film concerns--as other reviewers have noted--a wandering and unfocused script. Although Alan Parker allows for an accurate (for the most part) and revealing look at life in the internment camps, we rarely see anything from Jack's (Dennis Quaid) perspective. What happened to him after he went AWOL? How long were they apart? Also, the difficulties that everyone had with the marriage between Lily and Jack are resolved without any discussion. She simply comes home from Seattle and all is forgiven? The cultural tensions and familial disputes were left behind in favor of a highly politicized second half.

In order to fit in the family conflicts and internment episodes, the romance between Lily and Jack is hastened to the point of non-existence in the second half hour. Therefore the audience had little reason to dread their eventual separation, and rejoice in their ultimate reunion.

Finally, on an historical note, the Supreme Court case Korematsu vs. U.S. (1944) upheld the constitutionality of the internment camps. The movie portrayed a victorious Supreme Court decision that allowed for all internees to return to freedom. However, the US government did not officially recognize the unconstitutionality of Executive Order 9066 until 1988, with a Congressional apology and restitution.

Overall, because of the highly-charged emotional potential of the subject matter, I had expected a film with a little more feeling. And if a director/writer is going to make a political movie to illuminate a dark period of American history, he should at least get his facts straight.

Salome

This movie promised to be quite a provocative experience, as I was quite impressed with the soundtrack and the videos that were based around the love story theme. I'm a sucker for men confessing their hearts and souls, in the rain, to a distant woman standing aloof on a balcony. Very Romeo and Juliet in its desperation.

However, the movie did not deliver. Chris Cooper (Uncle Joe) was actually the only character that stood out to me as acting real. Gweneth Paltrow, playing her character to a tee, actually prevented the story from becoming a heartstrings type of love tale. From Dickens' novel, she was right in playing the ice queen, and because it was never meant to be a reciprocated love affair, Paltrow was wonderful.

This tale is about unrequited love. And while Paltrow did her best on the cool, distant end of things, Ethan Hawke was depressingly mediocre. With all his longing stares and puppy eyes, there was no indication that he was free of the bonds of his life in order to fully give himself to his obsession. For most of the movie, chanelling his feelings into his art seemed an acceptable distraction. There was no fire.

Finally, about the story and the adaptation. One of the main themes in Dickens' novel has to do with the guilt that Pip (Finn) feels after discovering that his benefactor is a criminal. It brings into question his ambition, the truth about his success, and his own feelings of inadequacy around rich socialites (I mean, how at ease could you feel once you had learned that the only way you are able to hob-nob with the wealthy was because a murderer paid your way?). This revelation was again supposed to distance him from Stella, because he might as well have been poor, living off of money that was not of his own making. Because this aspect was underplayed to the point of non-existence, there was no real impact upon learning about Robert De Nero's true role in Finn's life.

Despite the lovely cinematography (it had a very stylish feel), overall, this movie was weak--weak in its adaptation, its feeling, its depth. There was no driving fire that propelled the two characters along star-crossed paths. There was simply ambling along with misunderstandings and compromise. Not a romantic piece, but a tepid one.

--Salome

The marketing for this film in America was absurd when compared to the real thing. I had seen the trailers, and as I am intrigued by anything with Ralph Fiennes, I took notice. However, the preview stressed an gambling-chance-obsessive fun aspect that I found less than compelling. Had the true soul and purpose of the movie come through in that two minute-long advert, I would have been hooked. As it was, I waited until it came out on video.

My expectations, coloured by this misleading trailer, were well exceeded. The film had to do with love and gambling, yes, but there were elements of faith, guilt, family, destiny and survival that were wholly ignored in the press. Ralph Fiennes is marvellous as a disheveled and uncertain faithful, with a boyish charm and utter purity that is difficult to portray without seeming slow-witted or unlikeable. Cate Blanchett, who has received a tremendous amount of notice for her recent portrayal of Elizabeth, is a fountain of strength, charm, capricious abandon, intelligence and sensuality. Like her minor role in _Paradise Road_, she steals scenes and breaks hearts with an undeniable charisma and resolve.

Set in Australia, the story is surprising, and ultimately shocking in its constrast of the ideal and the real. I was moved, and thoroughly impressed with this movie. This is a romance for those who are tired of the predictable, the trite and the overworked. The scenery is beautiful, and the direction is both soft and unflinching. A wonderful achievement.

--Salome