O Anjo da Guarda

When "North" came out, it got a scathing review in Portland's newspaper The Oregonian (I found this out several years later, as I didn't know about the movie's release at the time), and Siskel & Ebert named it the worst movie of 1994 (I knew about this at the time). Even the previous reviewer on IMDb.com called it the worst movie ever.

When I saw it a few months after Siskel & Ebert named it the worst flick of 1994, I couldn't understand why people blasted it so. Granted, it wasn't a masterpiece by any stretch - we expect really good movies from a director like Rob Reiner - but it was interesting if absolutely nothing else. Featuring the title character (Elijah Wood) getting a divorce from his parents and traveling the world looking for new ones, I guess that it was little more than a way to pass time. Perhaps "North" had little more to show for itself than a giant cast: Bruce Willis, Jason Alexander, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Dan Aykroyd, Graham Greene, Kathy Bates, Alan Arkin, and even a very young Scarlett Johansson. But when you get right down to it, a giant cast isn't any kind of crime. Like I said, I found the movie interesting if nothing else.

And to the reviewer who called this the worst movie ever, I say this: you don't know the worst movie ever until you've seen the dreadfully boring "Baryshnya-Krestyanka", which I saw while in St. Petersburg, Russia, last semester. If in fact it's based on an Alexander Pushkin novel, then Pushkin must spin in his grave every time someone watches that movie. The only way that I kept sane while watching it was by throwing out comments like on "Mystery Science Theater 3000" (and then when I wrote a review to turn in, I dedicated the review to Bob Denver, who had died a few weeks earlier). My point is, even that last reviewer would have to agree that "North" looks like "Citizen Kane" compared to "Baryshnya-Krestyanka".

So that's my take on everything.

Those who argue that North is sexually pornographic or unrealistic or lame don't seem to get the point and present arguments that just sound unfounded and absurd. I really think some people use these film comments as an excuse to vent their frustrations at their spouse or their boss through their ridiculous tirades. I'll try to present an intelligent and useful opinion of this fantastic movie.

Cherubic at 11-ish, Elijah Wood delivers an astounding performance for an actor of his age as North, a model child who doesn't like his parents, not because they "don't let him do everything he wants to," as one reviewer wrote, but because they're negligent and self-absorbed (I believe there is a difference). He wins at court, not because this is a political drama, but because this is a FANTASY. It's a perfect example of Expressionist film: An Everyman character with a journey, a quest to prove something, including a character that represents guidance and purity of thought and mind, with a resolution and a moral. See this film for what it is people. It is a FABLE, the fact that the revolution is led by kids is just a symbol. It could be dogs or infants for that matter. It's not even a fable about negligent parents or abused children, it's about finding out who you are and where you belong. Honestly, it even has spiritual overtones to it.

Bruce Willis I find does his best work opposite kids (check out the Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, Mercury Rising, the list goes on). The supporting cast as the alternate as well as the original families are top-notch. I particularly enjoyed Jason Alexander, Jon Lovitz, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, and Reba McEntire's performances.

What confuses me is how Siskel and Ebert could rate this the worst film of 1994, with its brilliant script, stellar cast and incredible look and feel. I usually agreed with their reviews (that is, until Roeper came along). So see this movie, try not to be overly-intellectual, like I know many people love to be, and try to actually learn something rather than be constantly entertained, although North does both. I strongly recommend this for parents and children alike. The BRIEF language is somewhat offensive, so parents can use discretion if they must.

11/10.

I saw this movie when I was little, so maybe that's why I like it so much. Plus I love Elijah Wood in his younger days, like in Huck Finn and Forever Young. I think he's hilarious in this movie, and the movie is hilarious. I just saw it last night for the first time in years, and laughed so hard. I'm a big fan of Bruce Willis, and remembering he was in this movie was a big plus. Maybe it's one of those movies where you either love it or you hate it. It's fun and light-hearted and entertaining. I personally recommend it if you're ever bored and in need of something care-free and entertaining! I don't think you'll be disappointed, if you don't take it too seriously.

This movie wasn't as good as I thought, but it's okay. The idea was a very good one, but not realistic. The script should've been rewritten a couple times. One of the only good things about this movie was the casting. Don't be fooled. Great actors & a shallow plot didn't make this a legendary movie. If you do see it, make sure to bring the family, because it's cute enough for everyone to see. Even Grandma.

It is an ok family movie not bad but that good, beautiful story abot family love, the film has many overreaction silly parts to make it works but still in general its good because its talks about loving your family