Sanou_san

Audrey Hepburn certainly has her theatrical skills to pay for her admirable beauty. I remember reading a comparative review about Natalie Portman, with critics stated she's the present times' Audrey Hepburn. Upon hearing some good remarks from my officemate how Audrey did well on her movies Roman Holiday and Breakfast at Tiffany's, then maybe it is high time for me to see this lady predefine Natalie Portman's paralleled fame. I went to watch Breakfast at Tiffany's. The film was entirely great! I mean the story (first and foremost) was unexpected. Seeing the movie posters makes you think straight how the movie will turn out to be, but make you revoke your first impression upon seeing the rest. It was a good deal of a story. Nothing I could exactly remember in my movie experiences the same lucid story of a woman's desperateness to climb the top to provide for someone, while cloaking her pretentious strength and feebly endure her tangled situation. This is the first time I saw George Peppard and I must say he possessed the classic handsomeness and theatric skillfulness so unheard of that in my opinion (base on my research) was so underrated or underused. Audrey and George were cool together. Their tandem was a bit off because of their apparent differences but easily understandable as each other's milieu were understandable to his/her own. You could quickly discern that the moment they met, "Oh, he's the one." It's predictable, but what I don't hate about predictability is the storyline's beauty coating the entirety of the film to compensate for such "clichéness". You may have predicted it but you still haven't understood the rest yet.

George Peppard's performance was good. The first time I saw him use such skills was finer than any famous actor could claim for and averagely perform the act instead. He's was cool. The character was patient, conservative, looks weak and common at first glance, but straightforward and truer than any man you could imagine in the world. Audrey Hepburn was indeed superb. I can't find a word to truly describe her in this film. It's somewhere between best and average. I don't want to overrate her or even undermine her. She was really fun. It felt watching Katharine Hepburn in a different setting. She's fun, adorable, interesting, keen and makes you keep an eye until she broke the character's inner depths. I saw Natalie Portman's Black Swan before this, and I can see the two actresses' skinny stature comparable. But that was a pun. I can see half of it now why critics consider Natalie Portman as the current generations' Audrey Hepburn. I can't wait to see Roman Holiday and My Fair Lady. Audrey indeed did well in this film and so much of her I wanted to see more.

There you are the title defines the film itself. I resorted to the thought that I should be seeing a film one of the best actors living nowadays had acted with. I have to site that Jack Nicholson's best performance I've seen so far was since "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest". And I can't help grinning at thought of bringing the remnants of his acting trademarks which I saw in this film. Just creatively witty and this is the first time I saw Helen Hunt! She's just wonderful as well. It's indeed a bit off to imagine a grumpy, OCD writer, a troubled gay neighbor and a caring single mother would join and enjoy the full circle. It was really cool to see Nicholson do the part of bigoted, obsessively compulsive writer. Seeing and hearing Melvin Udall get to his clumsy attitudes amuses me, Nicholson is just cute for the part and he did it nicely. Helen Hunt has a bit of craziness and insensitivity there, but that's her character. The thought of hating it actually pulled through her acting skills. Greg Kinnear was also better. He did agreeably his role and it was splendid. The one impressed the most was the dog. It's funny, but considerably trained dog could have pulled the role. That was innovative. One thing lacking though is the part of Nicholson's character. I wish they could have emphasized more the background of his character's unlikely behavior. It wasn't only OCD that described Melvin's strange attitude but there was something else in there. I was thinking they could have focused on that side more deeply. The scene that struck me, it was only a moment but it was electric for me, was when Melvin was told to return the dog as Simon (Greg) was about to get better and wanted the dog back sooner. At that moment I saw how powerfully Jack Nicholson got into the character's deeply sad side. He was about to lose something that made him feel better. It was as if just the prior thought of it makes it painful for him. He cried! I almost cried seeing that! That was potent! I wish they could have brought a piece of that Melvin's side to Helen Hunt's character. But I realized later, the film went well probably without getting too much on that part. I've learned that a little of something so electrifyingly sensitive and catchy is best shown in seconds and in a single time only. As powerful as Jack Nicholson's performance at One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, this has to be his second most evocative performance. It should be understood that the film was more of a romantic comedy. Well I guess the little dramatic side of it makes it stands out.

This film made my thoughts over the old Germany changed. Well I guess somewhere in my subconscious told me that these merciless enemy of the world during the old times were actually as knotted and determined like any other country would fight for their aspirations. Sadly there are millions who are caught in between the warring countries' ambitions and idealisms. And the complicatedly sad truth about it is that those who took part as pawns of the warring countries had in no way desired what they leaders wanted. They're mixed up, confused, longing for their families, scared, lonely and angry.

I had this film long before. I just let it sit in my collections not knowing the brilliance it carries. I only owned it in the first place because it's a highly rated foreign film whose translation of German title I don't even know. I had the chance, the isolation to watch this film and it give me the chills over the beauty of the truth I never thought had been part of world history. The film per se is superb. The cast, the settings, and the sounds everything, as typical as they are, but like I always wanted over a film, whether it is cliché or contentious the story stands out. It's totally new to me! Warring countries fraternizing with each other? I mean if you've first heard of it and idiot enough not to think it's clearly impossible to happen. But the instance each party experiences led them to form such truce. It's heartbreaking, bitter sweet, poignant, touching at its best and really beautiful. Indeed nothing more is despicable than those who never thought of the efforts and lives sacrificed for the country's best. The leaders as they may be as necessary as leading the entirety could be as appalling more than the enemy for putting their men in no-man's-land while joyfully feasting over their wealth and safety. I saw through the characters inner thoughts. It was indeed the beauty that led this film as better as it was. I saw "The Pianist" and "Schindler's List", compared the two and filled my thoughts of hatred over the old Germany. But not everything was it seems to be. This film made its light seems ridiculous, impossible but in anyway such impossibility is probable when you know a man's heart speaks truly than they're countries' will.

A worth of film certainly. It made me cling to my religion tighter than ever. But really there are those well in the church that seem to know so well but knows nothing at all being in the war could bring forth.