dclark1963
Joined Jan 2001
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews9
dclark1963's rating
Briefly:
Ian Holm's presence can usually hold a movie together. But, for me, in this instance it wasn't enough. Joe Gould at first was intriguing. What did he write down? What snatches of conversation caught his interest? Why did he give up academia? How could he live like that? But after a while, I began to realize I no longer cared much. Lasted through the movie but was left with a "so what?" feeling. A reason is given after about 2/3's of the picture...uh, hello, was THAT the reason?
It portrayed a bag person very well; or, rather, it portrayed THIS particular bag person very well. It also portrayed a dysfunctional lost soul very aptly.
But the bottom line was -- wait, there was no bottom line. I was left unsatisfied, as if some kernel of truth had slipped past me unnoticed. Perhaps it had.
I'd give it a 5 on a scale of 10.
Ian Holm's presence can usually hold a movie together. But, for me, in this instance it wasn't enough. Joe Gould at first was intriguing. What did he write down? What snatches of conversation caught his interest? Why did he give up academia? How could he live like that? But after a while, I began to realize I no longer cared much. Lasted through the movie but was left with a "so what?" feeling. A reason is given after about 2/3's of the picture...uh, hello, was THAT the reason?
It portrayed a bag person very well; or, rather, it portrayed THIS particular bag person very well. It also portrayed a dysfunctional lost soul very aptly.
But the bottom line was -- wait, there was no bottom line. I was left unsatisfied, as if some kernel of truth had slipped past me unnoticed. Perhaps it had.
I'd give it a 5 on a scale of 10.
Although cheap as you can get, this movie was fascinating. I'm at least 40 years older than these guys, yet related to them easily -- they spoke my language (like it or not). They didn't bull**** (as I HAVE to here). Their feelings may not have been mature -- but whose are at that age? (I know mine weren't.) I liked these guys.
The script was bright & constantly fluctuating. To be frank, doubt that many would have the patience to stay with a mainly-dialogue picture. It was very much like a cinema verite film except it's so tongue-in-cheek that one can't help but smirk throughout the whole thing. Loved the bit about the guy who wanted first, to use the rest room; second, to borrow something to read, naturally one of the better porn mags; third, asking for 'soft' toilet tissue.
This movie, though really poorly made, was a stitch. If you don't mind bluntness & honesty, & have a good time getting your leg pulled, you might enjoy this.
The script was bright & constantly fluctuating. To be frank, doubt that many would have the patience to stay with a mainly-dialogue picture. It was very much like a cinema verite film except it's so tongue-in-cheek that one can't help but smirk throughout the whole thing. Loved the bit about the guy who wanted first, to use the rest room; second, to borrow something to read, naturally one of the better porn mags; third, asking for 'soft' toilet tissue.
This movie, though really poorly made, was a stitch. If you don't mind bluntness & honesty, & have a good time getting your leg pulled, you might enjoy this.
From the few reviews, assumed this would have been more like "The Great Imposter".
Found it slow, Matt Damon's emotional range akin to an amoeba, held little suspense, could barely identify with anyone on the screen, save Jude Law who was very good, displaying emotional depth Ripley could never fathom. For all his seemingly painful demons of the past, Ripley failed to move me. Paltrow fair, at the end finally exhibiting a bit more than a mannequin-like demeanor. Jack Davenport was exceptionally empathetic as a soul more in search of himself than Ripley.
Not a good movie; not even a time-killer.
Found it slow, Matt Damon's emotional range akin to an amoeba, held little suspense, could barely identify with anyone on the screen, save Jude Law who was very good, displaying emotional depth Ripley could never fathom. For all his seemingly painful demons of the past, Ripley failed to move me. Paltrow fair, at the end finally exhibiting a bit more than a mannequin-like demeanor. Jack Davenport was exceptionally empathetic as a soul more in search of himself than Ripley.
Not a good movie; not even a time-killer.