romarub

This film seems like a concoction of separate sequences that fail to coalesce into a meaningful, understandable or enjoyable entertainment. Every time I thought I was about to make some sense of what was going on, a new element was introduced that destroyed that expectation for me. Even impressionistic films should have some reference to a reality that can be related to. The individual sequences do provide this, but together fail to offer a "plot" that constitutes a coherent and understandable beginning, middle and ending - something that satisfies and resolves for the viewer a meaningful resolution of tensions, problems and conundrums that are presented along the way. Yes, this can truly be described as "Robert Altman's 3 Women" - something so personal and subjective that it defies a meaningful translation on a level other than for that of the one who conceived it. I'm at a loss to understand how others could find this film a "masterpiece", a work of genius, unless they derive enjoyment from reading into the inscrutable, cryptic and incomprehensible, a meaning that is not really there, and which, in truth, offers befuddlement, instead. Further, many of the more positive reviews (8-10/10) actually allude to and describe what are seen as the film's major shortcomings, such as the absence of a coherent or even identifiable "plot", leaving one to wonder about the legitimacy of the criteria used to rate the film so favorably. Watching this film, for me, at least, turned out more to be a chore or test rather than an entertainment, the latter being the reason I watch movies in the first place. Some films offer plots that are convoluted and complex, but questions that are presented are almost always resolved in real terms, one way or the other, by film's end. Not so with this film. A one word summary and review: frustrating.

San Francisco has to be one of the top 10 films of all time. It has everything, and everything is outstanding! The movie is built on pure emotion, from the highest high, to the lowest low. I will not attempt a synopsis of the plot, which has been provided elsewhere. Suffice it to say that the acting, the characters, the scenery, the special effects, the singing and music, and, of course, the plot, all keep this picture moving along with no lulls. Jeanette MacDonald's.singing is a high point for me, and her rendition of Marguerita iin Faust is without peer, as is all of her singing, highlighted, of course, by San Francisco The antagonistic relationship between Blackie Norton and Jack Burley is both realistic and right out of a medieval production! Spencer Tracy, as Father Tim, represents for me, the real culprit of the film, with his unrelenting sanctimony and overly intrusive attempts to influence the lives of others he has no legitimate justification to inject himself iinto to the extent he does ,other than to offer advice and guidance, if requested. I don't know if the character is meant to come off in this way, but that's always the impression I get of it. Still, the role is treated with the same expert perfection that all the players provide in their characters' interpretations. Clark Gable is outstanding. I have watched this movie dozens of times and never tire of it. This film exemplifies why black and white can supersede color in a film of quality, more than adequately (and less distractingly) to show and tell a story when there's something there to tell.

They simply "don't make films like this any more" - unfortunately. .

Battleground is a film that, in ways, was a precursor to later quality war films such as Saving Private Ryan because it succeeds so well on multiple levels. Not only is the context of the film, the war, itself, vividly and believably presented, but the human, personal stories of most of the characters are also depicted with a sufficient degree of depth and clarity as to make them "real people" the viewer can relate to. The history of the war and its realities was not given short shrift, and the sociopolitical aspects of the conflict were alluded to, without having the film bathed in blood and gore, but sufficiently depicted so as to present not only a background for what is viewed onscreen, but also a realistic depiction of the physical realities of the dirt and horrors of war, itself. All of the truths depicted in this film - of what the war was, what is was like to be an infantryman and the nature of warfare they dealt with, the human side of the characters - make for a film that was restrained when it could easily have been ruined by letting any of these factors become too dominant. Instead, we have a film that holds one's interest, makes sense, teaches and instructs, and is excellent entertainment.