pclem70

No spoilers, just an expression of amazement.

After being disappointed by the trailers I'd seen, I went in expecting little, but was completely "wowwed". I will see this multiple times. I saw it amongst folks who had not seen the television series, and when I asked them if they had trouble following the storyline, they denied any. Having seen the series in the intended sequence, I was very impressed with this movie, and how it "fit" with the established television storyline.

Acting and writing were top-notch. Very good pacing and dialogue. The effects were excellent, and they fit into the story seamlessly, and were not an end unto themselves. Even though the story is completely self-contained, an opening was left for a continuing storyline. If a sequel is made, I will see it.

Somewhere George Lucas is wishing that he could still make a movie like this.

This movie has generated a great deal of arguing, bitching, and whining about this movie, and that's really too bad. Here's the simple truth (or at least my closest approximation of such): If your favorite movies like Van Helsing, Armageddon, or anything by Jerry Bruckheimer, chances are that you won't like Closer. You will likely enjoy Closer if:

1 you are able to honestly say that you enjoy going to plays, as this movie was adapted from a play, and it shows. 2 your prefer Decalogue-heavy movies 3 you want to see Natalie Portman's buttocks 4 you can tolerate a slightly higher than typical amount of "dirty talk" in a movie, as well as a few scenes that are more risqué than artistic (though they were probably trying {without success}to be artistic, or at least clever) 5 you are not expecting a typical Julia Roberts role, or a "happy" movie of any sort. 6 you are able to enjoy a story of people with moral and mental health defects and their attempts to get what they want at the expense of others.

This is a movie that is clearly not for everyone. My wife and I quite enjoyed it, though early on we had our doubts. The movie builds a momentum with several plot twists and time lapses that require some effort to follow, but we like that sort of thing.

Roughly half of the 30-or-so person audience walked out during the first 45 minutes of the movie. We're both glad that we stayed.

Most of Christopher Lambert's filmography reads like a guide to B-movie hell. I got conned into watching this by a friend years ago, and will be forever grateful. The story is solid, Lambert turns in an almost-acceptable performance, and most of the rest of the cast does well. My favorite thing about the movie is the (by martial arts flick standards) realism. The gaijin does not miraculously learn to swing a sword like a samurai in a matter of weeks, months, or ever. The action sequences are exciting and fairly well-executed (by 1990's b-movie standards, at least), particularly a ninjas vs samuri scene on a Japanese bullet train. Some of the characters have a bit of complexity, there are a few little plot twists, and the character interaction is often believable. They also answer that age-old question "who'd win a fight between a middle-aged ex-athlete with a few months of kendo training and a ninja who's just lost an arm and leg"? (Lamberts's character is a former fencer turned businessman, but that bit's cut out of the home video/DVD version, as is the monologue by Kinjo the ninja, which helps to serve---in part, at least, as an explanation as to why this movie, set in Japan, has almost an entirely Chinese cast). If you're in the mood for an fun, entertaining, semi-intelligent B-action flick, I whole-heartedly recommend this one.

Oddly enough, the writer of "Pretty Woman" wrote and directed this flick, which may explain why my wife liked it, too. Of course, the same guy did a flick called "Cannibal Women in the Avocado Jungle of Death".