Intersection: Uma Escolha, uma Renúncia

I'm not quite sure what this movie's about. I'm not saying that I suspect that I missed some deep, subtle secret concealed within the narrative that only a select few will ever grasp (this, I assume, is true of the alleged comedy that I've missed in various 'comedic' films) -- rather, I'm just not entirely sure that this film delivers what it might have had it had a more coherent flow and some semblance of actually going anywhere. Not that that sentence that I just penned is a great example of those qualities, but I digress...

The movie features fine performances from all involved, including Lolia Davidovich and Sharon Stone and the pretty-much-always excellent Richard Gere. Gere's character is convincing and real, but perhaps a tad too real because he's a pretty wishy-washy fellow and his is not the most compelling of roles. Then again, neither is anyone else's, really. The two female leads get marginally more to wrap their skills around, but the whole is way less than the sum of its parts.

A 98-minute film, "Intersection" seems a lot longer and I found myself calculating time-elapsed and time-remaining at more than one point. Hardly a good sign. Sure, there are no Ramboesque explosions and car chases (though a high-speed driving theme is at the movie's heart) but I'm not the type of male who has to have that kind of thing to keep me engaged. A story might be nice, though. I mean, a story that hangs together. In the absence of much direction, and in the presence of multiple and confusing layers of flashback, the actors' great work is sabotaged. It just doesn't really seem to go anywhere.

When the film finished I felt the sentiment echoed in that old Peggy Lee song..."Is that all there is?" And I don't like Peggy Lee, darn it!

I thought this film was quite good, not slow or dull by any means. It's as solid and entertaining as most "top rated" modern films of similar genre. Maybe a bit too subtle for some people? There seems to be a problem with shortening attention spans.

There is a well controlled air of the unknown through the whole thing. The rain-soaked scenery is compelling, the acting is realistic and the final sequence is powerfully done. You never quite know what's going to happen, which to me makes a good film.

Did it get bad press before it was even released? I think people sometimes go in with a bias that has no explanation. Theaters themselves can spoil movies by way of unruly viewers and other distractions. Just going to the wrong place on the wrong night can give a movie a bad rep. Get a big screen TV or projector and tune all that out.

This unpopular film showcases wonderfully nuanced performances that flesh out a simple story with an interesting twist. Multiple flashbacks (or shifting timescape) delineate the story, making for a complex movie, but the patient viewer is rewarded in the end.

Richard Gere, Sharon Stone, and Lolita Davidovich breathe life into the three corners of a love triangle. Stone is especially good as the calculating Sally, whose formidable personality holds together only at the fast pace of high-end social and professional success. Gere manifests the ambiguity of a man who must choose not only between women but between parts of his soul. Spirited Davidovich is very appealing as a vital woman deeply connected to fundamental contentedness and freedom.

Some philosophy is in order when considering this intimate, thoughtful film. It portrays various aspects of the human condition without embodying them. For instance, Richard Gere plays a man in the grip of profound indecision, but director Mark Rydell's hand is sure and his intent clear (`Whatever you're going to do, do it!'). The movie compresses the many small but meaningful moments that make up a lifetime into a taut montage of images flashing before the viewer's eyes, evoking the close link between life, time, and death. It shows how the simplest, smallest gesture can trigger an epiphany of profound meaning as someone struggles to find clarity in their life. Best of all, the movie illustrates how, even in tragedy, everyone can come away with something positive worth clinging to, whether it's a message on an answering machine, a hurtful letter undelivered, or a plunge into the depths of peace.

I saw this movie for the first time today (I should be working on a project for my class...) and it was okay. Not horrible but not exactly anything amazing either. One thing I thought was interesting was the fact that they made one woman the embodiment of life and the other woman death (I'm trying not to spoil anything for those who may not have seen this movie yet). Once Vincent made his final decision on whom he wanted to be with, it was basically sealing his fate. Which was then reiterated during the operation scenes.

This is a good movie. Although I must admit sometimes it's a bit slow. I've seen it at least twice, and both times it mediated a special feeling that moved me.

The five main reasons why I liked this movie, are (not listed in any particular order):

1. Richard Gere - He doesn't give a great performance, but hey ! It's Richard Gere, and I really like him.

2. Sharon Stone - On the other hand gives a great performance. I've never seen her this good.

3. James Newton Howards fantastic score. The music over the final scenes and the ending credits is so beautiful and emotional, that it can make me cry everytime that I listen to it. The score enhances and puts an emphasis on the developments in the movie in an extraordinary way.

4. The script - Although it's not that tight, it's still well written, with likeable characters and a good message.

5. The feeling that this movie mediates, through the above mentioned reason, and lots more.

In conclusion: I recommend this film. It will probably not be the best movie you've ever seen, but well worth your time. And as I said, it has a good message.