Amazon.com

In The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, director Wes Anderson takes his familiar stable of actors on a field trip to a fantasy aquarium, complete with stop-motion, candy-striped crabs and rainbow seahorses.And though Anderson does expand his horizons in terms of retro-special effects and a whimsical use of color, fans will otherwise find themselves in well-charted waters. As The Life Aquatic opens, Zissou (Bill Murray), a self-involved, Jacques Cousteau-like filmmaker, has just released a documentary depicting the death of his best friend Esteban, who was eaten by some sort of sea creature--possibly a jaguar shark. Zissou’s troubles also include his waning popularity with the public, and a nemesis (Jeff Goldblum) who hogs up all the grant money. Hope arrives in the form of Ned Plimpton (Owen Wilson), an amiable Kentuckian who may be Zissou’s son. Despite his lack of enthusiasm for fatherhood, Zissou welcomes Ned--and Ned in turn saves Zissou’s new documentary (in which he seeks revenge on the jaguar shark) in more ways than one.

One of Wes Anderson’s greatest achievements as a director to date has been launching the autumnal melancholy phase of Bill Murray’s career, starting with Rushmore in 1998, and Murray delivers a similarly comedic yet low-key performance here. Unfortunately, Zissou is one of the few characters in this ensemble to achieve multi-dimensionality. Even co-star Wilson doesn’t get to develop Ned much beyond Noble Southerner, and he ends up seeming more like a prop for illustrating Zissou’s emotional development rather than his own man. The Life Aquatic probably won’t be remembered as a great film, but it is still one that no Anderson (or Murray) fan can afford to miss.--Leah Weathersby ... Read more

Reviews (153)

A Wes Anderson Film I Can Stand
I've always had a hard time stomaching Wes Anderson's odd-ball, eccentric artsy-fartsy style, especially after the release of The Royal Tenenbaums, which I hated because of its flat humor, completely uninteresting story line and extremely unlikeable characters. Rushmore was decent, but nothing I found exceptional. But with the release of The Life Aquatic, Wes Anderson has concocted a film that is both visually and stylistically appealing, and is filled with memorable and interesting characters surrounded by a sea faring revenge documentary adventure. And it's actually funny.
What really drove this movie was Bill Murray's performance as the insincere famous oceanographer/filmmaker Steve Zissou. This kind of character is so Bill Murray's style and it's hard to picture anyone else playing Steve Zissou, it almost makes you wonder is Wes Anderson had Bill Murray in mind for the character when writing the story.
And not just Bill Murray, but Owen Wilson, Jeff Goldblum, Cate Blanchett and Angelica Houston all perform nicely. Even Willem Dafoe's small part is done very well, and quite hilariously I might add.
Besides the acting, I really liked the overall story line that never lacked in having a hilarious sense of adventure and danger as Steve Zissou's crew goes an on a crazy and irrational sea quest to document Zissou's revenge on the infamous Jaguar Shark that supposedly ate his best friend Esteben. More importantly, its actually about Steve's relations with Ned, a man that's probably his son that he never knew.
So where The Royal Tenebaums failed at producing interesting characters and story line, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou is completely the opposite and it's without that "I'm-sorry-if-you-can't-follow-my-artsy-sophisticated-style" feel to it, thank God.

Stinks
worst movie of the year. This movie has alot of great actors but the story is lame and the jokes are not funny. In short stay away from this bomb.........

A beautiful, intelligent, and fun film
I loved this film from start to finish and it only got better the second and third times I watched it.There is a very nice feel to it: mellow, easy and cool, even when the action is on.This feel is perhaps captured best in the remarkably enjoyable Brazilian covers of classic David Bowie songs.

One thing worth noting about this film, beyond the "quirky" stylings that you expect from Wes Anderson (and that don't always come off, to my mind, as I just couldn't get in to The Royal Tenenbaums much as I wanted), is the way the film plays with and responds to the popularity of the "nature documentary," especially those of Jacques Cousteau.In the nature documentary, we feel as though we are getting "closer" to nature.We believe that we are getting at something real.What we tend to forget or be unaware of, is how much mediation is involved in the presentation of nature.The nature we see on film is never nature "as it is" but nature as it has been framed and captured in accordance with certain expectations of what will sell, what values will play to a wide audience.

It should also be remembered that this is a Disney film, and Wes Anderson appears tobe very self-conscious of the fact that a large part of Disney's name and popularity was established through Disney wildlife films.Walt Disney himself once remarked that he saw his live action wildlife films to be merely an extension of his animations -- because he knew how much the editor and filmmaker are involved in showing what you want to show.What they did show was not Darwin's "nature red tooth and claw" but a sanitized nature, where danger was always contained, and family values were reinforced by the behaviors of animals: a mother and her pups, for example.

That, it seems to me, helps explain the fact that Wes Anderson chose not to employ "real" underwater animals but chose stop motion animation as his medium.It reminds us that nature appears on screen always mediated, through a "nature hero" (as Zissou once was) and through a set of decisions about what to include, how to edit it, what to value.

Anyhow, I could go on and on about what I liked and thought about this film, but I can say that I didn't expect to like this film but found myself surprised feeling very nice (and a bit odd, not sure what to think) about half way through and leaving with a smile and a hint of sadness as I walked the theater.Any film that can do that to someone as jaded as I am has something going for it.

ZZZZZ....Is This A Movie?!
Holy cow! I tried staying awake long enough to see if this movie would develop a plot, have some intersting special effects, but nothing even remotely resembling a movie ever took place. I barely was able to keep my eyes open. I thought maybe it was an artsy attempt at being clever, but this was absolutely the lamest, low budget, poor plot-movie I had ever seen. Even the usually likeable and clever Bill Murray fell FLAT in this movie. I watched it wih my brother and wife. She only made it through the first 20 minutes. My brother and I are more optomistic and somehow made it through the first 70 min., fast forwaded to the end, and didn't even carre that Owen Wilson's character had died!! If you want a movie that will put you to sleep, this is it!

Call me weird...
...but I really enjoyed watching this film. Willem Dafoe carried a manic comic energy throughout that was the perfect foil to Bill Murray's well developed drollery. I thought the take off on the Jacques Cousteau TV specials was spot on and truly humorous. I did not laugh out loud all the way through this film mind you, it is chock full of dull stretches and things that just make you want to scratch your head in puzzlement. I do that all the time with Wes Anderson movies, so I guess this one should be no surprise. I found this film to be clever, smart, profoundly silly, and usually just plain fun. The views of the fanciful sea critters encountered by the crew were very well done and showed a great deal of imagination and wonder at work. The fellow who kept popping up singing David Bowie songs in Portuguese somehow stole my soul and I couldn't get the sounds out of my head. Lovely idea squeezed into a wonderfully odd little film. C'mon, since when does everything have to make sense to be fun? ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

This tearjerker by Australian filmmaker Scott Hicks is a surprising story about real-life classical pianist David Helfgott, an Australian who rose to international prominence at a very young age in the 1950s and '60s, and suffered a psychological collapse after enduring years of abuse from his father (Armin Mueller-Stahl). Hicks has three very fine actors portraying Helfgott at different stages of his life, including the adorably wry and goofy Noah Taylor (Flirting), who takes up the character's teen years, and Oscar winner Geoffrey Rush, giving a great performance playing the musician as a schizophrenic adult. Despite the Helfgotts' compromised psychological health, Shine is hardly a depressing experience. If anything, the story is really about how long one person's life can take to make glorious sense of itself.Sir John Gielgud, in golden form, plays Helfgott's teacher. The DVD release presents the film in its widescreen format, and also includes a Q&A with director Hicks and Rush's Golden Globes acceptance speech. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (37)

OUTSTANDING movie presented on an average DVD
Bear in mind that this was one of the first generations of DVDs that were released, and so many of the additional features that we enjoy now were never added in these earlier release titles. I do hope that "Shine" is re-released with more in- depth features, including something that focuses on David Hefgott, the pianist that this movie is based on. I truly hope the decision is made to interview or document Helfgott in some way. That's the only reason I deducted a star, because the movie is outstanding. I would urge those who enjoyed this film to contact FineLine Pictures, who released the movie, and urge them to create a special edition DVD to include this.

The real David Helfgott actually contributed as a musician (pianist, of course) for this wonderful film about his life, dramatizing his struggles through his childhood and breakdown as an adolescent. Yet it isn't about gloomy and depressing accounts but about survival and living to the best of one's abilities. Those who have little patience with people who are schizophrenic may become a bit uneasy at the performance of Geoffrey Rush who played the adult Helfgott. Rush's acting was impeccable and very believable, which is why some might be a little agitated or confused at the stuttering and incomplete and rambling dialog by Rush's character.

But have patience in getting to understand Helfgott as the movie progresses. It can confuse the viewer since there are flashbacks and flash forwards. But you know, this was one beautifully produced movie. It has had high replay, because the film simply touches the heart. Just relax and allow the movie (and Helfgott's character) absorb you. By the end, you'll really FEEL how much of a journey that David Helfgott traveled to arrive where he did.

And for those who enjoy Lynn Redgrave, my gosh. Her portrayal of Gillian was superb. Redgrave didn't even get any type of top billing and she didn't appear until late in the movie, yet I felt like Gillian and David were my own family by the end.

The DVD's special features include a movie trailer, a video clip of an award presented to Rush (look for Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise together in the audience) and a somewhat unusually- formatted Q/A with director Scott Hicks (about a dozen questions are displayed and when you select one, a video with an answer by Hicks plays).

"Shine" wasn't meant to be a tearjerker movie, but it got to me. I sometimes can't watch even the trailer without getting a lump in my throat.

Lovers of piano concertos and also those who appreciate classical music would be especially grateful for this cinematic gem.

Powerful, and stunning
This movie is just stunning, I've never seen a movie that has so much power, so much enthusiasm, and so much drama all at the same time. I'd recommend this movie to anyone! It's the best movie I've ever seen, I instanly went out and got the sound track!

The music in this film is just outstanding, and it will make you want to go and learn to play the piano.

Everyone in this film does an excellent job. This movie just draws you into it. I'm a man who has always liked the scary movies, and also the funny ones, never drama. But this movie just blew me away with it's joy of the human spirit. My heart still races when I hear the beautiful music of the film. Great job to everyone.

I'd really like to know more about this main character as far as what's he doing now, and did he play any part in the making of the film. This is just a tremendous movie!

Disturbing, but is that a good or bad thing?
I enjoyed this movie for the most part. After all, it was well-acted, had beautiful music, had an uplifting, inspring ending, what's not to like, right? Well, fact is, it's been a while since I saw it, and frankly I can't remember the music, or even much of the story; so, what's left, you ask? Vivid recollections of the disturbing behavior of the characters, and a feeling of unease, and wanting to avoid watching it again. Too bad, but maybe I'll just get some of artist's music instead.

GREAT MOVIE
All I can say is, everything you want in a dramtic film is here. The realism of overcoming harsh abuse by an over protective father and the quest to play Rachmaninoff's Concerto No.3 lends itself to a first class dramatic piece of work.The music is excellent and I can't say enough about Geoffrey Rush's performance as the true David Helfgott is unforgettable.

Incredible Actor Performance !! Wonderful Film !
Even now, after seeing "The Pianist" from Polansky, I think that SHINE is equally or even a more "brilliant" film, let's say... And in fact the main Shine Actor role demands such an interpretation that we don't see in "The Pianist", which actor almost look the world on a passive way... Shine, on the other hand, is an amazing film, it's actor seems to really incorporate and love the character !! Shine exuberates in love for life in such a way that it literally extracts tears from our eyes.
Perhaps if the "The pianist" actor would be that one of Shine, the result could be better.
In a phrase: Shine is one of the best all time movies. Get it!

Dihelson Mendonca ... Read more

Reviews (477)

All That's worth watching
This sweet coming of age tale follows newcomer Patrick Fugit's cross country journey with a 70's rockband by the name of Stillwater. The film is based on director Cameran Crowe's real life experience (also the director of Say Anything, Jerry Maguire, Singles) as the youngest journalist ever to work for Rolling Stone.
He goes to a high school where the kids hate him. He has a mother whose somewhere in between June Cleaver and someone Norman Bates would be bratteling on about. He also has a personal relationship with the Roger Ebert of music critics Lester Bangs.
Lester Bangs invites young William to interview Black Sabbath for him. Instead he runs into the band Stillwater, and the alluring Penny Lane (played by Kate Hudson). When Rolling Stone offers him a chance to travel with the band, and do an interview, William jumps at it.
Ultimately what makes a Cameran Crowe movie worth seeing isn't the plot details, but the characterizations and tender moments of humanity his films provide. Crowe is able to illicit an emotion from his audience without feeling the need to beat his audience over the head with it.
Also, the wonderful performances provided by Kate Hudson, Billy Crudup, Jason Lee, Frances McDormand, Fairuza Balk, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, and Patrick Fugit provide more quality acting then three years worth of Oscar ceremonies.
Almost Famous is a funny entertaining, and moving film. It is the quality of this film that won it the Golden Globe for Best Picture and has appeared on over 250 critic's top ten lists. It's a movie with an undefinable quality, but will stick in your memory long after you've left the theatre.

A Crowe's Life
The main character in Almost Famous is a 15 year old rock journalist named William Miller. He gets the chance to write an article for Rolling Stone magazine about an up and coming rock band, Stillwater. He goes out on tour with the band and what starts out as a simple assignment, turns into a life altering experience for all involved. The character of William is director and writer Cameron Crowe's on screen alter ego. Mr. Crowe was a 15 year old who wrote for Rolling Stone and the story is based on his life. The film also involves William's overprotective and aggressive mother (played by Frances McDormand) and the battles she waged with his sister. They are based on Mr. Crowe's own family's struggles and the fact that he was willing to air his family's problems in public adds a touch of humanity and reality to the film. Stillwater is led by Jeff Bebe and Russell Hammond who bicker at one another about the band's future and possible fame. Billy Crudup plays Russell the lead guitarist and Jason Lee is Jeff the lead singer. They have a natural fear of the press and refer to William as the enemy. In fact, William struggles to get an one on one interview with Russell throughout the film. The band is followed on tour by a bunch of groupies who refer to themselves as Band-Aids. Their leader is Penny Lane played wonderfully by Kate Hudson. She is in love with Russell, but it is William whom she confides in. The tender relationship between Penny & William is one of the film's great strengths. Throughout the film, William seeks and gets advice from legendary rock critic Lester Bangs. Mr. Bangs is played amazingly by Philip Seymour Hoffman. Mr. Hoffman provides the film's conscious and his brief time on the screen is electric. All the performances in the film are first-rate including Ms. Hudson who is luminous, Mr. Crudup is brooding and dark, Mr. Lee is self-righteous and Ms. McDormand is a fierce presence. But the most startling performance is that of Patrick Fugit as William. Mr. Fugit had never appeared in a movie before and had minimal acting experience, but he is the emotional center of the film, the link between al the characters. He plays William perfectly and captures the essence of what Mr. Crowe was trying to capture. Mr. Crowe guides the film with an eye for detail as the sets and feeling are completely real and harkens the spirit of the 70's. His screenplay perfectly balances drama and comedy and has some of the sharpest dialogue in a long time. Mr. Crowe took home a Best Original Screenplay Oscar at the 2000 Academy Awards for this great script. Almost Famous is Mr. Crowe's love letter to his youth and the 70's. The film is easily his most personal, but it is the personal touch he adds that gives the film its universal appeal.

"I AM A GOLDEN GOD!" -Russel (Billy Crudup)
I loved this movie. Really, that's all that needs to be said. It is one of those films where you know there are flaws here and there, but it is so utterly engrossing and the tone is so perfect you forget that there are moments when there should have been more drama, but it was toned down for inexplicable reasons.

This is one of my shorter reviews, but really, there isn't much you can say except:

-Kate Hudson was mysteriously intoxicating. You believed every guy wanted her.
-Frances McDromand made you feel sorry for her despite some unnecessary strictness. And she was hilarious.
-If you find rock awesome (like I do), you'll appreciate this portrait of the genre, the bands and the fans, and what drives it all.
-The writing was often clever and involving, if a little on the lighter side (sometimes, not for the best).

So I recommend this film to fans of entertaining, breath-takingly sweet (but not over-the-top), unbelievably "cool" movies, and to fans of classic rock. There's nothing left to say except: have fun.

The real deal
I got this director's cut edition because I so was so intrigued by the original theatrical release. I wanted more.

What I didn't expect was how very the new material (typically extended scenes though there are a few new scenes as well) changed the tone and feel of this film. Penny Lane comes across as a tragic, lost soul. Stillwater comes across as a bunch of debauched, spoiled, poorly educated, brain challenged musicians. The "suits" - including the Rolling Stone "hippy suits" - come across as sharks. William Miller comes across as a well intentioned but naive quick learner. He seems vulnerable. Alot of the ackward mysteries of the theatrical release (How did Lester Bangs and William end up at a pizza joint after they had just said good-bye? Why did Russell deny everything after encouraging William to write what he wanted to? What held Stillwater together after those shocking confessions on the plane? There are many other examples.)

It almost like a different film! In fact, a BETTER film I would have to say.

Further, based on my experience in the music industry I found this director's cut to be more reality than fantasy -- the inverse was true of the theatrical release from my perspective. It's STILL not at a "documentary" level but, hey, this isn't suppose to be a horror flick is it?

Also, I know it's kind of whacky (maybe I'm a brain challenged musician too) but I really dig Stillwater's music. I have been listening to the Stillwater CD that comes in the package since I got it. I agree with Cameron Crowe, if these guys toured I would go see them! The movie is great but this CD (filled with songs by Nancy Wilson of Heart and Peter Frampton) really cooks.

Overall I just couldn't be happier with my Almost Famous Director's Edition set.

Almost Famous Is A Perfect Movie
Director-writer Cameron Crowe's ode to rock n roll is more than
just the coming of age tale he wanted to tell for a long time, it is the crowning achievement that not only vastly impressed critics, but it also vasly impressed audiences as well. This is
an autobiographical account of Crowe's early days, working as a
teenage reporter for Rolling Stone magazine, in which we are introduced to his alter ego, which is 15 year old William Miller
(Played by newcomer Patrick Fugit), who gets introduced by rock
music from his spiritual older sister Anita (Zooey Deschanel). Following this and the overprotective attitude of his mother (Played by the always entertaining Francis McDormand), William
Miller goes on the road to interview the band Stillwater who is
headed by the lead guitarist (Billy Crudup), from then on he starts to travel with these people and meets an upbeat and very
beautiful road groupie named Penny Lane, who is played by the
always gorgeous Kate Hudson, who not only gives a breakthrough
performance, but delivers the performance of her career. I will
stop talking here, just see this wonderful wonderful movie. Filmmaker Cameron Crowe may have been put on the map by Say Any-
thing and Jerry Maguire, but it is Almost Famous that is his
main crowning achievement and to prove it, he won a more than
well deserved oscar for best original screenplay. Francis McDor-
mand won a well deserved oscar nomination for best supporting
actress. However it is the talent and gorgeous Kate Hudson who
steals the show as rock groupie and wallflower Penny Lane. She
was so great shw should have won the best supporting actress oscar. However Marcia Gay Harden won instead for her brilliant
performance in Pollock, but I would have given Marcia Gay Harden
the oscar for her performance in Mystic River instead. This movie is a must-see film. Long Live the 21st century, I love the 21st century including it's movies, internet, DVD's, music,
and Cable TV.

Other Films Directed By Cameron Crowe
Say Anything (1989)
Singles (1992)
Jerry Maguire (1996)
Vanilla Sky (2001) ... Read more

Reviews (724)

"TECH SUPPORT!!!!!!"
Watching this after viewing the convoluted mess, MULHOLLAND DR., was like a breath of fresh air. Here is a convoluted film with BIG IDEAS and an actual pay-off at the end. AND IT'S FUNNY!! Some [people] claim this movie made no sense and was full of holes. Huh? The whole thing is spelled out in it's conclusion. Cameron Crowe practically leads you by the hand. ... Having seen this PSYCHOLOGICAL MASTERPIECE 3 times so far, I couldn't find a single hole in it's superbly delineated plot.

Not being a fan of Penelope Cruz or Cameron Diaz, I went into this film with low expectations. I was wrong. Cruise and Cruz have great chemistry together. Obviously because of their off- screen chemistry. And Cameron Diaz' performance is chilling. I have a newfound respect for her. Next to BORN ON THE FORTH OF JULY, this is Tom's best performance by far. He says, it's his favorite film to date. No kidding!! His performance is sad, hilarious, and profoundly touching. BRAVO!! Jason Lee is always great and he's a riot in this film. Hope to be seeing more of him, now that he's mainstream. Kurt Russell in a marvelously understated role.

... Granted what at first appears to be a psychological thriller, which it is, ultimately becomes a science fiction odyssey of the mind. [For those] who couldn't understand why Tom Cruise gets in the car with Cameron Diaz: Diaz offers Cruise sex. This is the important choice that Cruise makes which ultimately changes his whole life and the direction or conflict of the story. And he doesn't "punch her in the face" because he's trying to talk her down. ... It's about the male libido. It's about thinking with one's head and not one's.....ahem. "It's about choices" is stated several times in the film. As for the identities changing during Cruise's nightmare nothing could be more obvious: his subconscious is playing out his tortured feelings of guilt about Cameron Diaz' character. "The subconscious is a powerful thing" is stated several times in the film. Psychology 101. Pretty simple stuff when you see it unfolding. ... As for comparing this to MEMENTO: OK, a psychological thriller with an unusual timeline device. But MEMENTO had a fill-in-the-blank pay-off. What was the motivation behind it all? Why was this guy manipulating this other guy's mind? We'll never know. Doesn't really matter. These two films are pretty far apart in their intentions.

This script could have come from the mind of Phillip K. Dick- sheer paranoia, except for the ending, which is full of redemption and hope. Stunningly put together and masterfully directed by Cameron Crowe. The music is wonderful. One expects the music in a film such as this to be haunting and weird, ala David Lynch, but the choice of tunes is a reflection of the main character's taste in music. GOOD VIBRATIONS?- man, that was out of left field.

The DVD format is artfully done and the extras are good, although the MAKING OF segment, PRELUDE TO A DREAM, could have been more extensive. DO NOT watch PRELUDE TO A DREAM before watching the film. It gives away a part of the plot ... You do get a COMMENTARY by the film maker which I haven't clicked on yet.

Not as psychologically disturbing as FIGHT CLUB, but close.

Wow, I thought the meaning of this MASTERPIECE was fairly obvious, but after reading some of the other reviews, I guess I have to say, go into this one with an OPEN MIND.

BRILLIANT!! Thanks, Cameron Crowe and Tom Cruise, for helping to restore my faith in Hollywood. This movie is one of the reason's why I love film. One of the 2 or 3 best films of 2001.

What Is Real?
Vanilla Sky is a visually and intellectually fascinating film that many viewers and critics found too confusing to enjoy. What starts out as a surreal mystery turns out to be an exploration into the nature of reality. In this way, it is similar to The Matrix, Dark City and some other recent films where the characters are never sure what is real and what is a dream (or computer-generated fantasy). Vanilla Sky also has some David Lynch-like features, as when people's identities seem to randomly morph. Unlike Lynch films such as Mulholland Drive, however, Cameron Crowe's story at least offers an explanation for the confusion. The explanation won't satisfy everyone (as some of the harsh criticism of the film shows), but to focus too much on this is to miss the point, which is to make us ponder some big questions regarding truth and reality. Helped by some very good performances by Tom Cruise, Penelope Cruz and Cameron Diaz, and some stunning visual effects (such as a truly eerie scene of a deserted New York City), Vanilla Sky is an entertaining and intellectually stimulated film. Just don't expect a straightforward, linear story.

IF YOU LIKE PLOT TWISTS YOU WILL LIKE THIS MOVIE.
"Vanilla Sky" is a remake of the Spanish film "Abre Los Ojos (Open Your Eyes)", and if you have seen the original film, you know that "Vanilla Sky" was made almost in the same way, but there a few key differences. The camera angles, the plot and most of scenes are almost the same in both movies, but "Vanilla Sky" uses a different music, this movie has a rock-oriented music score. Also, the character played by Cameron Diaz is an improvement over the original character, because Cameron adds more depth with her performance. Of course, since "Vanilla Sky" is a Hollywood movie, the visual effects and the budget are bigger this time.

"Vanilla Sky" offers a lot of plot twists, so the first screening might be mind-blowing to some viewers, if you like simple plots perhaps "Vanilla Sky" is not your movie. But if you like to be tricked with the characters and the plot, this film is for you. "Vanilla Sky" plays with the time, the movie goes back and forth between past and present, and sometimes you don't know if some events really happened or if the main character is just having a nightmare.

The cast in "Vanilla Sky" is very interesting: Tom Cruise is David, the main character, and Cruise gave one of his most inspired performances in recent years. Cameron Diaz is outstanding as Julie, she improved the character from "Open Your Eyes". Penelope Cruz plays exactly the same role, yes, the same role in both movies, one might think that she would improve her performance this time, but nop, she reprises her role step by step. Jason Lee plays Brian, the best friend of David, and he does a good job here, he adds sympathy and charm to his character. Kurt Russell plays McCabe, the psychiatrist that tries to solve the puzzle.

"Vanilla Sky" is an effective thriller, packed with plot twists and good music, if you like this movie, I strongly recommend you to see the original film "Abre Los Ojos (Open Your Eyes)", you might find that both films share similarities, but they are different movie experiences.

An amazing film that could have been stellar
I have watched Vanilla Sky three times now, and every time it has left me powerfully affected. It deals with many topics that interest me, particularly the study of dreams vs. reality, and the nature of relationships, and love. There is much that is very good about it, however it contains one major flaw that prevents it from being truly great.
The acting, is overall top notch. Jason Lee turns in yet again another stellar supporting role; he radiates charisma in this performance, and fits the role given perfectly. Cameron Diaz is a fine choice for Julianna, she brings an almost maniacal sense of urgency to her character that was both disturbing and complusively watchable; she simply looks amazing on film. Tom Cruise performs more than adaquetly as well, and perhaps the greatest kudos must be given to Penelope Cruz, who simply lights up the screen here. Her charisma is unmistakable, and she infuses this film with life and vibrancy. This is a film with many powerful images, be it the gorgeous vanilla skies that soar over New York within the dream, or the (SPOILER) unforgettable image of Cruise's David Aames waving farewell to his disfigured reflection in the mirror. It entices in the first viewing, draws you in irresistably, and apon further viewings still moves with great pacing, and many subtle clues and hints can be found that help the viewer understand the nature of David Aame's reality. My only real complaint is that Cameron Crowe for some inexplicable reason (though it certainly must have been because of confused test audiencies, those who this film is not intended for anyway) chose to come out at the end of the film and blatantly reveal all of the films secrets and twists; he talks to the viewer as if we were 5 years old and need him to hold our hand. This film could have been very similar in nature to, and even rivaled Lynch's masterpiece Mulholland Drive had Crowe not chosen to do so, and it is very disappointing that he did in fact choose to do so. But this aside, the film is very compelling and often powerful. I still love the questions it raises concerning love (if his love with Sofia wasnt "real", than does it still have meaning?), and the image of "I will find you in another life, when we are both cats" that so powerfully emphasizes the power that love can have, and the joy and awe surrounding that human emotion. For a similar image look in the closing chapters of the novel The Amber Spyglass by Philip Pullman. But i digress. This film is solid, even coming from hollywood, and with big name stars attached. I would certainly recommend it to anyone who is willing to be challenged slightly by the film they watch, and those who love to be moved.
Highly Recommended

5 STARS FOR THIS BLOATED TRASH? YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING!!
The most amazing thing about this movie is finding people who are actually giving it 5 stars. I guess this just goes to show you that if you pour enough money in any misguided enterprise with flatulent ego, there are some people who are going to think it's great. Especially amazing are those who actually compare this horrible incoherent mess favorably to the original, ABRE LOS OJOS. Very depressing indeed. As depressing as watching a really ugly and annoying woman wearing a ton of make up and expensive designer clothes and parading around in a roomful of myopic and deaf people applauding her as she screeches away fit to break windows...................... ... Read more

Reviews (27)

Interesting concept. Great performance by Noah Taylor
Playing the role of Adolph Hitler probably guarantees that you'll never work again in Hollywood. I think that's why the relatively unknown Australian character actor, Noah Taylor was chosen. He is the best thing about this film. Noah brings to life a young Adolph, full of disappointment at coming home from the Great War, only to face unemployment and rejection. Noah's portrayal of Adolph's gradual confidence, in his belief that politics the new artform is chilling.

John Cusack's acting, on the other hand is so unbelievably wooden, that he doesn't even manage to give a realistic performance of a person experiencing pain, in a scene when he is being kicked to death by Nazi's. Someone with real talent, such as Kenneth Branagh, would, I think have been better cast in the role of the art dealer, Max Rothman. The script is stilted and the two token women in this film are not given any real chance to reveal their characters.

So, if you are curious about the concept of Adolph Hitler as a failed artist and want to see a good actor make a bad script shine, I suggest you buy this film.

After you see it, I think that you will agree with me that Noah Taylor has done a brilliantly realistic job of portraying the of the most hated man of the 20th Century.

Fictional Account of Real Motives that Shaped 20th Century
Max Rothman (John Cusack) is an art dealer and World War I veteran in post-war Germany. In 1918, he makes the acquaintance of another veteran and aspiring artist by the name of Adolf Hitler (Noah Taylor). Hitler is a good draftsman, but is never able to convey any meaning or feeling in his paintings. Nonetheless, Rothman sees Hitler's anger, frustration, and self-doubt and encourages him to reveal those emotions in his artwork. Ultimately, Hitler finds that he cannot, but that politics is the perfect vehicle for his feelings. Defeat in WWI and the humiliation of the treaty of Versailles have left a void in the German psyche that radical new political movements exploit to their advantage. And Adolf Hitler comes to believe that Politics is the new Art.

"Max" is a fictional film. Max Rothman did not exist. But Adolf Hitler was, in fact, an aspiring artist of apparently little talent before there was any such thing as a Nazi. "Max" proposes a scenario of what might have transpired if Hitler had been befriended by a perceptive, sympathetic art dealer, who, nonetheless, understood the marketplace for art and the shortcomings of Hitler's paintings. Why make a mostly fictitious movie about a very real and very loathed historical figure? "Max" places Adolf Hitler in the context of post-WWI Germany and shows us why his ideas found a substantial audience. More importantly, the character of Max Rothman is able to comment directly on Hitler's personal failings and idiosyncrasies, while providing an example of how Germans who were more saddened than angry at the nation's difficulties were dealing with the situation. "Max" allows us to see Hitler through the eyes of someone who understands him, is repulsed by him, but at the same time pities him. Rothman can say to Hitler what we might say to him had we known him at that time in his life. And Hitler can say what he might have said, given what we know of him, in response. This film is an interesting way of illuminating Adolf Hitler's character and motivations. "Max" elucidates the personal -not political- reasons for his actions. And all motivations are ultimately personal. John Cusack is particularly good here, successfully expressing Rothman's intelligence, charm, and resignation to life's realities. Noah Taylor effectively conveys Adolf Hitler's extreme emotional needs. Highly recommended.

Disappointingly shrill and cliched...
Perhaps I was watching a different version of the MAX that's gleaned such glowing reviews. I disagree with most of them adamantly. With exception of FIRST CIRCLE post-WW I ambience of Germany which Director Meyjes effectively evokes;and typically fine acting of John Cusack as Max Rothman,I found this "border-line" art film about ART & EVIL very disappointing.In my estimate, Noah Taylor's portrayal of Hitler as aspiring artist was shrill and repugnant,approaching parody.There is nothing charismatic or remotely fascinating in his one note characterization of the man Lucifer himself might yield to. From the jump, Hitler is portrayed as frustrated punk with illusions of grandeur and delusions of talent.[The scene in the hovel/attic where he attempts to paint, and realizes he has no artistic ability is POWERFUL.] Even scenes where Hitler's once-and-future Nazi mentors recognize his--historically undeniable--warped Preacher's "grace" as orator are unconvincing because all Taylor does(like many of today's talentless RAPPERS)is fume and scream.

MAX had possiblity for being an unforgettable political HORROR film; perhaps cult classic. Its failure is magnified. Ambience, theme and Cusack cannot save a cliched effort in PM murk. Director Meyjes utterly misses this "incarnation" of Hitler.His man claims to aspire to construct classic BEAUTY. In resentment and unparalleled egotism, he determines to DECONSTRUCT an entire world order; murder millions; and poison human desire for the Good,True & Beautiful: SOMETHING WICKED,indeed,THIS WAY COMES. Meyjes and Noah Taylor,ultimately, do genesis of Evil disservice by displaying it as teeth-grinding PETULANCE without seductive glamour or potential for perverse triumph. MAX'Hitler is a fool. History records he was sheer TERROR.(2 & 1/2 stars)

The frustrated artist Hitler looks for his "authentic voice"
A standard question concerning ethics asks if you could go back in a time machine and have the chance to kill Adolf Hitler as a baby, would you do it? Another "what if?" concerning Hitler has to do with his attempts to be an artist. Hitler's artwork is rather cold and uninspiring, but it seems reasonable to speculate that if he had been a better artist he would not have turned to politics and the 20th century would have been completely different.

Writer-director Menno Meyjes explores this idea in the 2002 film "Max," in which Adolf Hitler (Noah Taylor) is still living in military barracks in Munich as Germany signed the Treaty of Versailles and is trying to make a name as an artist. He shows his work to Max Rothman (John Cusack), a Jewish art dealer who lost an arm in the World War and who is consumed by the idea of the subversiveness of modern art. Hitler disparages such ideas, considering them "blood poisoning." Rothman and Hitler argue about art, both in terms of the futurist movement and Hitler's lack of an "authentic voice" in his own work.

Meanwhile, at the barracks of the decommissioned army, Hitler is folding laundry and being courted by Captain Mayr (Ulrich Thomsen), who is teaching a class on propaganda. Mayr is a historic figure and it is in his responses to Mayr and others in the barracks that Hitler is his most articulate and persuasive in dispensing his particular brand of venom.

The major fault I find in this film is that both the script and Taylor's performance play too quickly to the ranting Hitler. One of the great distortions of Hitler's legacy is that the black & white film footage of Hitler speaking comes from the climax of his speeches, when he has worked himself and his audience into frenzy. But Hitler always built to such a crescendo. He would show up late for speeches, making his audience wait in anticipation, and then stand there until the audience got quiet, and then would stand some more, building the drama. Then he would begin speaking softly, so that his audience strained to hear him. Hitler was a devastatingly effective public speaker and every time his oratory is reduced to rants and raves we have an incomplete and inadequate understanding of the monster.

What lies at the heart of the film is the idea that you either take the view that Hitler is a madman born in sulfur who wrecked havoc on the world or that he was a kind of hustler. Meyjes goes with the later view, presenting Hitler as a frustrated artist whose evil was rooted in that frustration and his inability to express himself. It is in his engagements with Rothman and Mayr that Hitler finds his "authentic voice," and comes to the fatal conclusion that politics will be his art and the German people his canvas.

"Max" ends the relationship between Rothman and Hitler on an ironic note, which is exactly what I expected. After all, by both his failure and his success with Hitler, Rothman is pushing Hitler towards the horrors of Nazi Germany, and his fate in the film symbolisms what is to come. Meyjes is not trying to tell a true story here; after all, Hitler had a handlebar mustache during this period after the war, but having Taylor play the future Fuhrer clean-shaven seems appropriate for this provocative story.

Of course this film is provocative; it should be. Reducing Hitler and the Nazis to being anti-Semitism misses the whole fascist dynamic of the struggle towards order that became the Cold War mentality. Meyjes takes the rather simplistic idea that if someone like Rothman had been a better patron to Hitler the artist that everything would have been different. But the script is so intelligent and the performances so compelling for the most part that we are willing to think along these lines at look at Hitler in a new light. This does not mean that we see him as being a better person, but rather than we better see him for what he was by considering how he became that way.

Too much fiction, not enough fact
This film would've carried more power if it had not used a "cut-up" of different art dealers and patched them into the fictional character of Max Rothman. The narrative is choppy as is the acting, but Noah Taylor's performance gives a reason to see this film. Taylor's portrayal, although a bit over the top at times, does create a humanity for Hitler that has never been attempted for and so a reason to see this film. It is an interesting film to be made at this time, in the midst of surging nationalism in the U.S. and the might-makes-right mindset of U.S. leaders. ... Read more

Reviews (150)

2.6 out of 5
After seeing the widely-shown trailers for this film, I have to say I expected a boring Indiana Jones rip-off. Well, it DID have some annoying Jones rip-off sequences, but hey - other than that, it surpassed my expectations.

Which still doesn't mean it's good.

Very attractive Angelina Jolie returns as Lara Croft, the female Indiana Jones-type hero. This time she's after Pandora's Box. Teaming up with an "old friend" (Gerard Butler), Croft must race against time to stop multimillionaire Jonathan Reiss (Ciaran Hinds) from reaching the ancient box - if she fails, the world will fall into Reiss' hands.

The film was no more entertaining than the first film, although the action was slightly better, and the overall film was a little more well-made. The soundtrack flunks in being as good as the first, but the acting's improved (except for the "It's more powerful than you could ever imagine" - that part featured some very poor acting) and the directing's better this time 'round. You see, the film's major problem is that it has all the right stuff to make a great movie - it just never does anything with it!

I love the character of Lara Croft, and enjoyed the video games, so I hope they make another film - but please, this time, let's drop the Jones routine and just make a good movie.

Give it a chance, you just might like it.
First off, I one of the minority that enjoyed the first Tomb Raider, so I walked into this one with hopes for the best, despite what the critics were saying. Critics, huh? Who needs 'em?

Angelina Jolie is radiant as ever; she's sexy, slick, and incredibly intelligent and resourceful. The part where she sucker-punches a shark is damn cool. Needless to say, Jolie is the best part of the franchise, even if her acrobatics are unrealistically perfect.

The story and acting is improved over the first. The "Cradle of Life" plot is preposterous, of course, but how it fits into the bad guy's evil plan is pretty sinister, and it makes sense with all the real world fear of chemical and biological weaponry. The villain is less of a man of action than Iain Glen in TR1, but this new guy is more sophisticated, smarter, and meaner. Gerard Butler, though half his dialogue in incomprehensible thanks to his accent, works well as Jolie's counterpart/love interest, and his character strikes me as just the kind of guy Lara Croft is likely to fall for.

The locations are beautiful to behold, especially in China and Africa. The "sky-diving over Hong Kong" sequence is just short of drool-worthy. However, some of the interior sets are just plain bland.

The action scenes are the one downer here; Jan de Bont downshifts from Simon West's starting point, and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I wanted more from the gunfights, which seemed lethargic. My two favorite scenes in the movie are when Lara duels with Chen Lo (she defends herself with an unloaded bayonet rifle by twirling it like a trained Marine...super badass) and the CGI "Shadow Demons" sequence, which I was originally dreading, but the way the scene is edited makes it rather cool.

If you enjoyed the first Tomb Raider, check this one out. For all its flaws, Angelina is worth it. ALL HAIL ANGELINA... ANGELINA IS YOUR QUEEN...

The best tombraider movie hits the best in dvd
I love this movie, and it's better than the first. She goes to all these places, I recommend this Movie. I'm also selling mines so e-mail me at JJ_025@lycos.com

A JOLIE GOOD SHOW
This sequel to the original is more entertaining and visually interesting than the first. Jolie returns as the indefatigable Lara Croft, aided this time by Gerard Butler (Dracula 2000, Timeline), a former Marine turned mercenary/traitor. Butler and Jolie have a fairly good comraderie, although it's definitely Jolie's move every way. Ciaran Hinds (Road to Perdition, Sum of All Fears, Veronica Guerin) makes for a sturdy villain, all grimace and spit. The movie revolves around the search for the mythical Pandora's Box; Hinds plays a viral bacteriologist who can release deadly viruses and he wants the box to let loose the contents of Pandora's box as the ultimate weapon.
Jan deBont (Speed) directs with a kinetic energy, and Alan Silvestri's score is impressive.
The ending is a real shocker in some ways; in the extras, we see an alternate ending that was less visceral.
Don't know whether this series will go on but it should have a little life left?

Better than the first
Better and more enjoyable than the first film, Lara Croft, Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life is a fun escape pure and simple. Angelina Jolie reprises her role as the video game heroine in search of a mystical orb that can lead to the discovery of Pandora's Box. A maniacal super villian (and a better one than in the first film) is on it's trail as well, so Lara has to partner up with a traitorus old ally (Gerard Butler) as she travels from Greece to Hong Kong to Africa. The stunt work is electrifying and the special effects are solid, while director Jan de Bont gives the film it's own slick look rather than the amalgam look of the first film. The unbelieveably hot Jolie is great again, but you can't help but feel that she is too good for this role. All in all, Cradle of Life is a worthy action escape, and those let down by the first film should give this a look. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

My Favorite Movie Ever.
I tremble as I write this review, for fear that I cannot put into words how I feel about this movie. This film...touched me in a way no other film ever has. I watch it endlessly, studying every detail, every nuance, every line of dialogue. This film is so beautiful, every aspect. The acting, the script, the photography, all of it. Danny Embling stands next to Holden Caulfield as one of the greatest fictional characters ever created. This movie has inspired me so much, every time I watch it I am still deeply moved. The final scene where Danny sits, smoking the cigarette and looking out at the landscape uttering the last words of the film will always haunt me. I hope someday to get to Willy Hill.

Danny loves Freya, but Freya loves Trevor...
"The Year My Voice Broke" is a touching coming-of-age film from Australia. Set in the 1962 in a small Outback town in New South Wales, the title refers to Danny Embling (Noah Taylor), who has always been in love with the beautiful but independent Freya Olson (Loene Carmen). They have been friends since childhood, but, unfortunately, she falls for Trevor (Ben Mendelsohn), the school's star rugby player who has more than a taste for running afoul of the law. Writer-Director John Duigan must be working from material close to home here, because he does an excellent job of catching the pain and torture of teenage longing, especially in the scenes where Danny followz Freya and Trevor on their dates. The ending for the film is certainly not a happy one, but what is important is that it certainly rings true for all those of us who remember how it feels the first time you fall in love and she simply does not have a clue. "The Year My Voice Broke" is as bitter-sweet as you would expect from the title. Standing out in the supporting cast is Bruce Spence (from the "Mad Max" movies) who plays Jonah, a railroad signal man who is busy writing the first truly erotic Australian novel. This 1988 film won five Australian Film awards including Best Picture.

A rural tragedy
This a pleasant and moving little film. Its strong points are the sence of place and the landscape. The sountrack is the Lark Ascending by Vaughn Williams. Although English music it captures the feel of the Australian country side wonderfully.

The hero of the film is a young boy of 15 who fall in love with an older girl from a poorer family. She is involved with an older kid who is always getting into trouble. The 15 year old watches the tragedy which unfolds from a distance. Around him live adults who have lived damaged lives.

Danny loves Freya, but Treya loves Trevor...
"The Year My Voice Broke" is a touching coming-of-age film from Australia. Set in the 1962 in a small Outback town in New South Wales, the title refers to Danny Embling (Noah Taylor), who has always been in love with the beautiful but independent Freya Olson (Loene Carmen). They have been friends since childhoo, but, unfortunately, she falls for Trevor (Ben Mendelsohn), the school's star rugby player who has a taste for running afoul of the law. Writer-Director John Duigan must be working from material close to home here, because he does an excellent job of catching the pain and torture of teenage longing, especially in the scenes where Danny followz Freya and Trevor on their dates. The ending for the film is certainly not a happy one, but what is important is that it certainly rings true. "The Year My Voice Broke" is as bitter-sweet as you would expect from the title. Standing out in the supporting cast is Bruce Spence (from the "Mad Max" movies) plays Jonah, a railroad signal man who is writing the first truly erotic Australian novel. This 1988 film won five Australian Film awards including Best Picture.

Poignant tale that captures the essence of growing up.
How easy it is to forget, the often awkward and sometimes painful moments we endure, in making the transistion from childhood to adulthood. "The year my voice broke", does a wonderful job of rekindling those feelings, while at the same time adding dashes of good Aussie humour, which keeps the mood from being too sombre. The setting, in a sleepy Australian country town, where the street lamps attract hundreds of circling insects at night, adds much to the atmosphere, as does the wonderful, haunting musical score. This is one of my all-time favorite Australian films. The only note of disappointment for me, was the DVD transfer itself, which is not much better than your average video. However, given that this is a relatively unknown film outside Australia, I guess I'm happy that it made the transfer to DVD at all. Acting by the entire cast is quite believable, though not polished in the typical Hollywood style. In particular, through the lead role of Danny, touchingly portayed by Noah Taylor, I was drawn into the turbulent, and bittersweet ordeals of his emerging adolescence. I've watching "The year my voice broke" many times, yet I still find it a moving, satisfying experience, that leaves me feeling reflective even after the credits have finished. Highly recommended for teenagers and up. ... Read more

Reviews (37)

OUTSTANDING movie presented on an average DVD
Bear in mind that this was one of the first generations of DVDs that were released, and so many of the additional features that we enjoy now were never added in these earlier release titles. I do hope that "Shine" is re-released with more in- depth features, including something that focuses on David Hefgott, the pianist that this movie is based on. I truly hope the decision is made to interview or document Helfgott in some way. That's the only reason I deducted a star, because the movie is outstanding. I would urge those who enjoyed this film to contact FineLine Pictures, who released the movie, and urge them to create a special edition DVD to include this.

The real David Helfgott actually contributed as a musician (pianist, of course) for this wonderful film about his life, dramatizing his struggles through his childhood and breakdown as an adolescent. Yet it isn't about gloomy and depressing accounts but about survival and living to the best of one's abilities. Those who have little patience with people who are schizophrenic may become a bit uneasy at the performance of Geoffrey Rush who played the adult Helfgott. Rush's acting was impeccable and very believable, which is why some might be a little agitated or confused at the stuttering and incomplete and rambling dialog by Rush's character.

But have patience in getting to understand Helfgott as the movie progresses. It can confuse the viewer since there are flashbacks and flash forwards. But you know, this was one beautifully produced movie. It has had high replay, because the film simply touches the heart. Just relax and allow the movie (and Helfgott's character) absorb you. By the end, you'll really FEEL how much of a journey that David Helfgott traveled to arrive where he did.

And for those who enjoy Lynn Redgrave, my gosh. Her portrayal of Gillian was superb. Redgrave didn't even get any type of top billing and she didn't appear until late in the movie, yet I felt like Gillian and David were my own family by the end.

The DVD's special features include a movie trailer, a video clip of an award presented to Rush (look for Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise together in the audience) and a somewhat unusually- formatted Q/A with director Scott Hicks (about a dozen questions are displayed and when you select one, a video with an answer by Hicks plays).

"Shine" wasn't meant to be a tearjerker movie, but it got to me. I sometimes can't watch even the trailer without getting a lump in my throat.

Lovers of piano concertos and also those who appreciate classical music would be especially grateful for this cinematic gem.

Powerful, and stunning
This movie is just stunning, I've never seen a movie that has so much power, so much enthusiasm, and so much drama all at the same time. I'd recommend this movie to anyone! It's the best movie I've ever seen, I instanly went out and got the sound track!

The music in this film is just outstanding, and it will make you want to go and learn to play the piano.

Everyone in this film does an excellent job. This movie just draws you into it. I'm a man who has always liked the scary movies, and also the funny ones, never drama. But this movie just blew me away with it's joy of the human spirit. My heart still races when I hear the beautiful music of the film. Great job to everyone.

I'd really like to know more about this main character as far as what's he doing now, and did he play any part in the making of the film. This is just a tremendous movie!

Disturbing, but is that a good or bad thing?
I enjoyed this movie for the most part. After all, it was well-acted, had beautiful music, had an uplifting, inspring ending, what's not to like, right? Well, fact is, it's been a while since I saw it, and frankly I can't remember the music, or even much of the story; so, what's left, you ask? Vivid recollections of the disturbing behavior of the characters, and a feeling of unease, and wanting to avoid watching it again. Too bad, but maybe I'll just get some of artist's music instead.

GREAT MOVIE
All I can say is, everything you want in a dramtic film is here. The realism of overcoming harsh abuse by an over protective father and the quest to play Rachmaninoff's Concerto No.3 lends itself to a first class dramatic piece of work.The music is excellent and I can't say enough about Geoffrey Rush's performance as the true David Helfgott is unforgettable.

Incredible Actor Performance !! Wonderful Film !
Even now, after seeing "The Pianist" from Polansky, I think that SHINE is equally or even a more "brilliant" film, let's say... And in fact the main Shine Actor role demands such an interpretation that we don't see in "The Pianist", which actor almost look the world on a passive way... Shine, on the other hand, is an amazing film, it's actor seems to really incorporate and love the character !! Shine exuberates in love for life in such a way that it literally extracts tears from our eyes.
Perhaps if the "The pianist" actor would be that one of Shine, the result could be better.
In a phrase: Shine is one of the best all time movies. Get it!

Dihelson Mendonca ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

The second part of a projected trilogy by Australian director JohnDuigan(the preceding film was The Year My Voice Broke), Flirting is awonderful tale of misfit adolescents who find their independence through aforbidden, interracial relationship. Noah Taylor returns to Duigan's ongoingstory as Danny, a gangly stutterer with a wry wit, few friends, and a bigcrush on Thandiwe (Thandie Newton), a Ugandan student whose father is in somepolitical danger back home. Danny goes to a boys academy and Thandiwe boardsat a girls school nearby. The two meet secretly and deepen their doomedaffair, exploring adulthood for the first time on their own terms. Duigan isa director who can occasionally be seduced by the surface of things, butFlirting is richly layered in tones both light and ominous, youthful performances that easily alternate between childhood buoyancy and grown-uppassion, and a hard-won wisdom about the mysteries of loss. An added bonus isa terrific supporting performance by Nicole Kidman. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (22)

Love without Bounds
Really a superb, charming, and deep coming of age movie. When I first saw the dvd box, I had no interest at all to see this. I thought the cover was sort of tacky and my first impression of the film was that of a corny teen comedy. Needless to say, I saw this on tv and was really amazed how good this movie was. Probably the most impressive aspect of "Flirting" was the grace of the script and how well all the young actors and actresses performed. Noah Taylor and Thandie Newton were just outstanding and really believable. I really enjoyed Nicole Kidman and Naomi Watts also in their supporting roles. It was really great to see all these big names in roles before they made it big. Much respect to director and writer John Duigan. Cameron Crowe has stated that Noah Taylor is one of his favorate actors and you can definately see that he has to be a fan of Duigan's too. I was more amazed to learn that "Flirting" was a sequel and even more amazed when I watched the previous film, "The Year My Voice Broke."

Superior coming of age from down under
Don't let the title fool you. Although this is one of the sweetest movies you'll ever see, it is no beach blanket bingo for bimbos. This is an Aussie story of teen love set in 1965, heroic as only teens can play it. It is fun to watch, authentic and original at the same time, a coming of age flick in the English boarding school tradition of "Dead Poet's Society" (1989) and "A Separate Peace" (the novel, not the so-so movie). Noah Taylor stars as Danny Embling, an outsider who reads Sartre and Camus while satirizing the school's empty traditions. Across the lake is the girl's school where Thandiwe Adjewa (Thandie Newton), daughter of the Ugandan ambassador, is learning to meld with the Aussie pale faces, including a gifted pre-Hollywood Nicole Kidman.

Thandie Newton and Noah Taylor, as beautifully directed by John Duigan, are the reasons this film is so good. She has a fearless integrity about her that overcomes the prejudices of her school mates. He is wise and brave at a hundred and twenty pounds. She too is ultra sophisticated. She even met Sartre. This is a story about the love between two outsiders who, with their strength of character win over not only their classmates, but the audience as well. Imagine teenagers as witty and poised as say Eartha Kitt and Gore Vidal, and you get a hint of how it's played.

Nicole Kidman as the snobby Nicola Radcliffe (the name says it all) manages a subtle supporting role with a diamond-in-the-rough kind of charm and just the right touch of on-screen growth. The scene where she shares her stash of vodka (or perhaps a clear fruit liquor) with Thandiwe Adjewa is beautifully turned by Director John Duigan. Also excellent is the hotel scene where the adults are revealed as intrusive in the extreme. I like Danny Embling's line as he deadpans to a re-robing Thandiwe, "They're all funny, aren't they?" Yes, those adults are a little peculiar.

This is not unflawed, however. The ending, despite the rousing music, seemed a bland washout, leaving us with a sense of disappointment. And I thought the first love scene with the two "touching" was a little unreal. I mean he might have kissed her! There's a limit to how great a coming of age, boarding school movie can be, especially when the adults have only scarecrow parts. Nonetheless "Flirting" is a confectioner's delight, and one of the best coming of age movies I've ever seen.

I love Flirting
I love this movie. It's a charming, delightful and wonderful little known gem. Thandie Newton is beautiful, Noah Taylor is endearing. A great script. One of the most romantic little films I've ever seen. Lets not forget Nicole Kidman and Naomi Watts are also in this film.

Flirting
I love this movie. I've watched it repeatedly and have enjoyed it each time.

Great cast and director
I haven't seen John Duigan's preceding film ("The Year My Voice Broke") but Noah Taylor was obviously fascinating in "Flirting" as a dreamy misfit in a Nazi-like boarding school. Honestly I could hardly relate this British guy to the roles he later landed in such Hollywood movies as "Almost Famous", "Lara Croft Tomb Raider", "Vanilla Sky"... What an amazing evolution for a versatile actor.

The same fine performance that made this film deserve 5 stars was delivered by Thandie Newton who would also become a celebrity a few years later, starring with Tom Cruise in two blockbuster hits, "Interview With a Vampire" and "Mission Impossible II" (although her best film to me must be Bernardo Bertolucci's "Besieged"). Add an exceptionally talented Nicole Kidman who was actually 24 years old when she accepted this role of a teen, and you got a perfect cast to turn a not-so-sensational-coming-of-age love story into a nearly perfect romantic comedy. Oh yes, it should also be noted that Taylor, Newton and Kidman were not the only ones to work their way to stardom since this film was released in 1991. Among the girls of Cirensester school, have you noticed a Janet Odgers? That role was played by a young and pretty Naomi Watts. ... Read more

Reviews (596)

"My ignorance amuses me." At least it amused somebody...
Tomb Raider is the kind of movie you can watch while reading a book and not miss a thing. Lara Croft originated in video games as a wild, sassy heroine with amazing acrobatic skill and two Desert Eagles to back her up, and her games supercharged that industry. The idea for the movie was to cross Indiana Jones with James Bond, throw in a little bit of Batman's dark side and humor from The Mummy, and populate the lead role with a sexy, academy award-winning actress, Angelina Jolie. You would think that formula couldn't lose, but the final serving is a mess. I prefer the video games, even the later ones.

Director Simon West approached this film as if he were shooting a commercial or music video. Every single shot is some high-concept, slow-mo dutch angle that lovingly follows our heroine on her adventure: we lovingly watch Lara open the door, then lovingly watch her close the door, that kind of thing. It gets old fast. The plot, too, is full of exotic locations and references to the films I mentioned above, and nothing is missing but some logic to make any sense of it. Major plot points are lost in the glamor, and the endless sexy shots of our heroine and her hapless foes. Enemies suddenly become friends for no sensible reason, and the major plot-twist is so uninspiring that if you blink you'll miss it. The CGI enemies for Lara Croft look terrible and are about as entertaining as a barrel full of Jar-Jar Binks'. The dialog is horrendous. "My ignorance amuses me" is a real line that is actually heard 3 times, and it was just as dumb as it sounds. I don't think the characters were even listening to each other, just say cool-sounding things to match the empty shine of the entire over-paid mess. The onscreen meeting of offscreen fatherand dauther John Voight and Jolie is touching, dispite the fact that they don't have much to say to each other.

I admire the daring of the filmmakers to place Lara Croft on equal footing with any male enemy she faces - Croft simply karate chops 'em to the ground exactly as if she were a man, no dirty tricks, just pure power and skill. Unfortunately, Angelina Jolie isn't believably as a nimble acrobatic kung-fu master. Jolie DOES play Croft with a large does of sensual sexuality, but she throws a kick like a turle, and the wire work in this move is terrible, nothing as interesting as The Matrix. Jolie doesn't look graceful, she looks clumbsy.

THE DVD - is a good one. The making of documentary is from HBO, which means that it's about 3 stars out of 5. There is an audio commentary and lots of little featurettes about various fxs and training for Jolie. U2's excellent video is a must see.

Horrible Overhyped Garbage
I'm glad women are finally starting to get more into action type films, but this Tomb Raider I was told was gonnah be the best female action star since Sigorney Weaver in Aliens.

Oh, how I disagree with that on so many levels.

Has this movie been praised because it stars a woman in skin tight clothing? Baring next to nothing? all while flying around, doing action seaqences, and over the top stuff like that?

Because thats what I think has given this movie any appeal at all! I cannot stand Angelina Jolie, but putting that aside to actualy focus on the fact that she is portraying a rip-off of Indiana Jones, and wearing , well, what some people would consider sexy attire/cloths... but to me, sex doesnt sell a movie. If you havent got a good movie, then dont expect showing some skin will make it any better!

The movie is terrible, Angelinas performance is sickiing, not only the cloths she wears to gain that attention of that kind of audience, but her acting both inhales and exhales (work it out, Amazon will filter my exact words for that)

If your a guy who want to see a chick put on some sexy clothing to get your attention to try and distract you from a pointless ,un thought out scene with special FX from tiem to time, then you will love this movie!

If you can actualy stand Angeliana Joalines conseeded acting, then you might like it.

But if your like me, and see through the B.S of trying to get a sexy image to sell, then youll see how this movie fails to bring a decent woman onto the screen for an action role!

I hope some actress becomes a super action star sometime soon, one maybe so even bigger then any male action star, but Angelina is not the one to look out for. Sex does not sell in my book!

0 stars

Good action but nothing to be remembered.
Tomb Raider is good fun and good for a rental. The Movie itself will eventually be forgotten. Angelina Jolie does good, and the plot it okay. The effects are good, as well as the settings. The movie is only okay. See it if you love action.

Not your average Chick Flick
I've never played the Tomb Raider games so I haven't a clue of what Lara Croft is really supposed to be like except she's a chick with big guns and other features. Let's face it. Despite the somewhat simplistic and rushed plot, people love adventure movies with danger, excitement and cool stunts, especially when girls are in it.

And I personally like Jolie's rendition of Croft. She's sexy yet sensual. Athletic yet Composed. Wryly coy at times, and to top it off...she's English. With the looks, lips and soft English accent, Jolie creates a very attractive Lara Croft with adventurous elegance and style...and it certainly helps that she's filthy rich. Comes in handy when supporting her expensive hobby.

I thought this was an enjoyable film despite the weak plot. Definitely worth the viewing.

Not much resemblance to the video game character
Tomb Raider the movie failed to be hardly anything like Tomb Raider the video game. Lara Croft in the video game is dressed in brown and green clothes, Lara Croft in the movie is dressed in all black.

Also, in the video game, she's just about always in tombs. In the movie, she hardly ever was in any tombs, and that movement of manuvers she did at the beggining of the movie in the tomb to make it seem as if it's the video game come to life expect for her black clothes, that was quickly over after only a few minutes and it was only in her backyard in her mansion where she practices.

She is a very sexy woman, though. (...)

Angelina Jolie's sexieness was the only good thing about Tomb Raider the movie, and again, if they were trying to make it as resembling to the video game as possible, then like that older movie Super Mario Bros., they didn't do so good. ... Read more

Reviews (596)

"My ignorance amuses me." At least it amused somebody...
Tomb Raider is the kind of movie you can watch while reading a book and not miss a thing. Lara Croft originated in video games as a wild, sassy heroine with amazing acrobatic skill and two Desert Eagles to back her up, and her games supercharged that industry. The idea for the movie was to cross Indiana Jones with James Bond, throw in a little bit of Batman's dark side and humor from The Mummy, and populate the lead role with a sexy, academy award-winning actress, Angelina Jolie. You would think that formula couldn't lose, but the final serving is a mess. I prefer the video games, even the later ones.

Director Simon West approached this film as if he were shooting a commercial or music video. Every single shot is some high-concept, slow-mo dutch angle that lovingly follows our heroine on her adventure: we lovingly watch Lara open the door, then lovingly watch her close the door, that kind of thing. It gets old fast. The plot, too, is full of exotic locations and references to the films I mentioned above, and nothing is missing but some logic to make any sense of it. Major plot points are lost in the glamor, and the endless sexy shots of our heroine and her hapless foes. Enemies suddenly become friends for no sensible reason, and the major plot-twist is so uninspiring that if you blink you'll miss it. The CGI enemies for Lara Croft look terrible and are about as entertaining as a barrel full of Jar-Jar Binks'. The dialog is horrendous. "My ignorance amuses me" is a real line that is actually heard 3 times, and it was just as dumb as it sounds. I don't think the characters were even listening to each other, just say cool-sounding things to match the empty shine of the entire over-paid mess. The onscreen meeting of offscreen fatherand dauther John Voight and Jolie is touching, dispite the fact that they don't have much to say to each other.

I admire the daring of the filmmakers to place Lara Croft on equal footing with any male enemy she faces - Croft simply karate chops 'em to the ground exactly as if she were a man, no dirty tricks, just pure power and skill. Unfortunately, Angelina Jolie isn't believably as a nimble acrobatic kung-fu master. Jolie DOES play Croft with a large does of sensual sexuality, but she throws a kick like a turle, and the wire work in this move is terrible, nothing as interesting as The Matrix. Jolie doesn't look graceful, she looks clumbsy.

THE DVD - is a good one. The making of documentary is from HBO, which means that it's about 3 stars out of 5. There is an audio commentary and lots of little featurettes about various fxs and training for Jolie. U2's excellent video is a must see.

Horrible Overhyped Garbage
I'm glad women are finally starting to get more into action type films, but this Tomb Raider I was told was gonnah be the best female action star since Sigorney Weaver in Aliens.

Oh, how I disagree with that on so many levels.

Has this movie been praised because it stars a woman in skin tight clothing? Baring next to nothing? all while flying around, doing action seaqences, and over the top stuff like that?

Because thats what I think has given this movie any appeal at all! I cannot stand Angelina Jolie, but putting that aside to actualy focus on the fact that she is portraying a rip-off of Indiana Jones, and wearing , well, what some people would consider sexy attire/cloths... but to me, sex doesnt sell a movie. If you havent got a good movie, then dont expect showing some skin will make it any better!

The movie is terrible, Angelinas performance is sickiing, not only the cloths she wears to gain that attention of that kind of audience, but her acting both inhales and exhales (work it out, Amazon will filter my exact words for that)

If your a guy who want to see a chick put on some sexy clothing to get your attention to try and distract you from a pointless ,un thought out scene with special FX from tiem to time, then you will love this movie!

If you can actualy stand Angeliana Joalines conseeded acting, then you might like it.

But if your like me, and see through the B.S of trying to get a sexy image to sell, then youll see how this movie fails to bring a decent woman onto the screen for an action role!

I hope some actress becomes a super action star sometime soon, one maybe so even bigger then any male action star, but Angelina is not the one to look out for. Sex does not sell in my book!

0 stars

Good action but nothing to be remembered.
Tomb Raider is good fun and good for a rental. The Movie itself will eventually be forgotten. Angelina Jolie does good, and the plot it okay. The effects are good, as well as the settings. The movie is only okay. See it if you love action.

Not your average Chick Flick
I've never played the Tomb Raider games so I haven't a clue of what Lara Croft is really supposed to be like except she's a chick with big guns and other features. Let's face it. Despite the somewhat simplistic and rushed plot, people love adventure movies with danger, excitement and cool stunts, especially when girls are in it.

And I personally like Jolie's rendition of Croft. She's sexy yet sensual. Athletic yet Composed. Wryly coy at times, and to top it off...she's English. With the looks, lips and soft English accent, Jolie creates a very attractive Lara Croft with adventurous elegance and style...and it certainly helps that she's filthy rich. Comes in handy when supporting her expensive hobby.

I thought this was an enjoyable film despite the weak plot. Definitely worth the viewing.

Not much resemblance to the video game character
Tomb Raider the movie failed to be hardly anything like Tomb Raider the video game. Lara Croft in the video game is dressed in brown and green clothes, Lara Croft in the movie is dressed in all black.

Also, in the video game, she's just about always in tombs. In the movie, she hardly ever was in any tombs, and that movement of manuvers she did at the beggining of the movie in the tomb to make it seem as if it's the video game come to life expect for her black clothes, that was quickly over after only a few minutes and it was only in her backyard in her mansion where she practices.

She is a very sexy woman, though. (...)

Angelina Jolie's sexieness was the only good thing about Tomb Raider the movie, and again, if they were trying to make it as resembling to the video game as possible, then like that older movie Super Mario Bros., they didn't do so good. ... Read more

Reviews (477)

All That's worth watching