Bgb217

If only you were able to rate with negative stars. New rule: if you're going to make a movie based off an author's work, and put the name of that author in the title, ie: "Bram Stoker's Dracula", or "Edgar Allan Poe's The Raven" as this movie is called, then you should at least make an attempt to address the source material at some point.

This movie has nothing whatsoever to do with Edgar Allan Poe or his poem "The Raven." There are select passages read out of context in the film, but none of these have any meaning whatsoever to any of the characters or the plot; they just try to make it fit the convoluted serial killer plot.

This film truly is a disgrace to Edgar Allan Poe's genius. "The Raven" is a work that is only meant instill fear through the possibilities it raises of madness, desperation, and that there may be no heaven, afer life, being after this.

But that has not stopped them from making this piece of crap, of the older version with a young Jack Nicholson that I also recall having nothing to do with the poem; but, at least from what I remember of that at a young age one late night on cable, that one had a plot.

This does not. It also features some terrible acting, completely senseless plotting... I don't know why we finished watching this, but we did.

Total piece of crap. Don't waste your time.

`Cold Mountain' may perhaps be the best picture of 2003. In a year of such feats as `The Station Agent' and `The Human Stain'. I think I am coming to realize, that the Civil War epic love story (sounds like it's been done before, doesn't it?) stands in a high place, maybe above those other first two.

You see, `Cold Mountain' is the type of movie that is rather hard to review, as there are aspects of the film and plot that one can't allude to without something being given away; with that I say, if you are an avid movie fan, and think you may want to see this film in any (even small) way, go see this art and experience it for yourself. Each performance in this movie fits into the larger puzzle in pieces, with supporting performers such as Natalie Portman or Donald Sutherland or Philip Seymour Hoffman playing their parts with a certain flawless, true and often brutal, beauty. And so it goes for the leads-each is simply spellbinding. I believe Nicole Kidman to be one of our time's greatest actors, and as Ada, one part of the epic (though unconventional) love story, gives a phenomenal performance; capturing an inexperienced character in love and life in the beginning pieces of the film, and taking that character on an amazing, harsh journey into real life and romance in the face of such terror, through the film's remainder. And Jude Law; I did not know he had this in him. I'd seen very good performances from him in `Road to Perdition' and even `The Talented Mr. Ripley', but as Ada's lover Inman, he blew me away. His accent, look, body language were all perfectly woven together in his character. As is also the case with Renee Zellwegger; of course, given the uneducated attitude one might attribute to a stereotypical `hillbilly' type of her character, it is not hard to see how some would think her performance strictly comic relief. But Ruby, her character, is so much more than all that. She's funny, she's honest, and she feels; she's human. A beauty character-in a beautiful ensemble.

On to the story, which has been called `uneven' by some, for reasons which include every thing to its only having one graphic strictly battle scene in the film's opening (one extremely powerful piece of cinema that effected me in a way I'm not sure I've been touched before) to Inman and Ada's relationship before the war being to brief, to the fact that Inman is a deserter, low-life, traitor of his cause. If you watch `Cold Mountain', and still think that, then I do not know what to tell you. Yes, it is about a deserter; a man who leaves the war he's fighting what is his life's love, for he yearns for life beyond the death of war and no longer wants to support anything such as the brutal ugliness of the Civil War. That is what the whole movie is about, love and life, and the pointlessness of fighting in the extreme ways of war. The story is about the people-not strictly the battle fought on the field, but of the ones fought in the soul-their love, their simplicity, their depth, their comic moments, their tragic moments; as the moments of their lives.

No other film this year has captured me into the state of emotional involvement, also. Though the film is something close to two and a half hours, to me it seemed nothing like the time. It did not seem short, but it was in no way `long'. It was a perfect piece of time during which I experienced some great, involving art. And while you have to see the film to understand the type of love story it is, I can tell you the love story had me entirely swept away (unlike Minghella's other major work "The English Patient". The final hour of the film had me, and then, I knew this was a feat of cinematic achievement regardless of the ending, and I let the film take me entirely.

The result was quite possibly one of the greatest movies I've ever seen.

I highly recommend you go see `Cold Mountain'. A standing ovation from me for director Anthony Minghella, leads Nicole Kidman, Jude Law, and Renee Zellwegger; and all those involved. Avery large, enthusiastic thumbs up.

I saw "The Hours" almost two weeks ago, and now I am glad I finally have time to write about it. Fantastic film. Funny how some small brained critics for some rather large publications were scared by it. That aside, before I saw the film I thought I was going to be disappointed; I'd heard it was all about suicide, and from that I thought I had guessed the ending. Boy was I wrong, and boy was I glad; the film is not about suicide being the only way out sometimes-- "The Hours" is about life, as it should be lived. Brilliantly written, told, acted, and therefore done, "The Hours" is a true masterpiece.

When I left the show after seeing this, the first thing that occurred to me was how great each and every actor in this movie was; Nicole Kidman WAS for the two hours I watched the film Virginia Woolfe, Meryl Streep WAS a woman named Clarissa living in New York in the year 2000, Julianne Moore WAS 1950's depressed housewife Laura Brown, and even Ed Harris WAS his character of a dying writer. I have to admit, I was a bit concerned with Kidman's fake nose, but that did not cheapen her performance or the movie in any way; it added to its greatness. The way she walked, the way she talked, the way she was-- was all so brilliant; Nicole Kidman is simply amazing. And Meryl Streep, her scenes of the emotions her character goes through are so genuine that they are simply brilliant. And then you have Julianne Moore who was nothing less than perfect as a depressed housewife. And then you get to Ed Harris, who plays a character with such emotional scenes that are so intense; some of the speeches he gives about writing and life-- I think I have rarely identified with a character in a movie such as I did to him with those words. And aside from his speeches, he not only looks the part, he acts them out in a perfect way that's simply brilliant. Give the whole damn cast an award, IMO.

But, without the writing, of course, there would be no "Hours". The adapted script and the way that it is shot is nothing less than brilliant; the idea behind it, a story of three women living in different times but reading the same book, still amazes me in a perfect way. And the three stories are told so seamlessly; it's simply an experience you have to see for yourself.

I would end the review here, had I not have to mention the aspect of sexuality that has been brought up in reviews I've seen: such reviews dubbed this as one about three lesbian women. And to that I say: say wha? I see one character who's sexuality is clearly defined, one character who tries something to see how her life would be if it were differently and is disappointed, and one woman who is clearly not a lesbian (I saw the kiss she gave to a woman as a way of saying good bye). But that said, I'm sure others may interpret the film differently. Also, in no way do I see this film as saying homosexuality equals madness; of course, believe me, it can lead to depression, though a kind that is not the clinical kind, one that is brought on by society in general giving you the message you're wrong just about every day, but I do not, in any way, see this film as against homosexuality.

In conclusion, "The Hours" is a purely brilliant film that's not to be missed. While it may be too much for some people, I still give this a high recommendation; the writing, performances, and overall execution are divine in this movie that stands among the most deep and moving ever made. Brilliant. Four out of four stars.