Reviews

I love Tom Hanks but I hated this movie. Best part was the Wilson Spaulding joke ... and that wasn't all that great. Nothing to think about, predictable ending (figured out the ending when I first heard the title of the movie), long lapses of nothings with nothings to follow.

I wouldn't recommend this film unless you really like Tom Hanks movies. I mean his acting was fine but the story sucked the big cahoona.

Regards,

*DATo*

'Hanging Up' is one of those movies you had to live through (as I have) to truly understand and enjoy completely. I played the Eve role in our real life family equivalent of this film ... and trust me ... when they wrote this script .. THEY DID IT RIGHT !

'Hanging Up' is a movie about maintaining your sanity amid the myriad of daily responsibilities imposed upon your life, not least of which involves the care and concern for a thick-headed though lovable father. Eve (Meg Ryan), Georgia (Diane Keaton), and Maddy (Lisa Kudrow), are three sister's with budding career's which demand their attention. Eve takes the self-imposed lead in looking after the welfare of her intransigent father (Walter Matthau) who is ill and suffering from dementia as her sisters disassociate themselves - not for lack of love, but because they are so preoccupied with dealing with the demands upon their lives. The central, and continually reintroduced, symbol in this movie is the telephone which serves as a primary '2000' symbol of both communication (or in some cases "disconnection") of the movies' characters, and the hectic pace of our technological times. Ryan, Keaton, Kudrow and Matthau's performances complement each other wonderfully in this story of fast paced family life in "The Zeros".

During the movie Eve has flashbacks to the earlier time of her childhood prior to her mother's desertion of the family and in one of the most moving scenes in the film she reluctantly visits her mother at her father's request in the hope of persuading her to visit her father who is now hospitalized and wishes to see her. During the meeting Eve is told quite mater-of-factly by her mother (Cloris Leachman) that she never wanted to be a mother at all. The scene dissolves with the implied understanding that there will be no visit.

At various times in the movie Lou, (Matthau) sings the song 'Once Upon A Time' in a hacking, lyric mutilating manner .... as the movie ends the fitting lyrics of this beautiful musical theme are repeated through the ending and into the credits ... as perhaps ... a summation.

I absolutely loved it .

I think M. Night Shyamalan made a very good movie with his creation and direction of 'The Sixth Sense' but it could have been better. It was like a masterpiece painting but you can't put a mustache on a Mona Lisa and expect it to work ... other's may still find her attractive but I'd be at least mildly turned off.

If this movie is viewed from front to back and immediately forgotten all is well and you will feel you've gotten your money's worth, but if you think back you will find many logic holes in the premise. The movies' "rules" (which are explained after the credits in a postscript trailer on the tape by Shyamalan and others) left me with the feeling that there was an attempt going down to distract me from thinking too much about what I had seen, or not seen, in the movie. All the rules were explained except one, and it was "the big one" which others have mentioned in their comments as well. I would agree with anyone who would say that fixing these holes would be a prodigious undertaking but I think it was possible and should have been attempted.

From an entertainment perspective this movie was great but that facial hair (logic holes) should have (and could have) been shaved off - and it would have been perfect. Overall I'd recommend it ... just don't think about it too much afterwards and you'll be OK.

Whenever I read about what a great movie 'Citizen Kane' is I am reminded of the story of the king who wore invisible clothes.

The king had this suit of clothes made which the tailor said "could only be seen by honest people" , in fact there were no clothes but the tailor relied on no one admitting that they could not see them. So as the king paraded by everyone commented on how lovely the king's new clothes were though they could see nothing. Finally, a child pointed to the king and said ..."But he has no clothes, he's naked!" ... and everyone understood that they were not dishonest people but that the king was a dunce.

That's exactly how I feel about this movie. EVERYONE says this movie is the greatest thing since sliced bread and I think half of them simply don't want other's to think they are artistically challenged, a remaining fourth have been convinced that they do like it even though down at the bone they don't, and the rest really see something good in the film.

I have tried repeatedly to find merit with this movie because everyone else says it's so good (so they must be right and I must be wrong) I have studied the reviews and looked for all the devices within the movie that supposedly make it so great ... but I have come to one conclusion .... the king is really naked.

I have read 'Fail Safe' (the book) by Eugene Burdick and Harvey Wheeler about 10 times and seen the Fonda movie about 5 and both were fantastic. I waited with anticipation for the "Clooney version" and counted off the days till it was to be aired ... I put Post-it notes on my mirrors and doors so I wouldn't forget ... and when I finally saw it I wanted to throw up. They played around with the original script and characters and generally screwed the whole thing up ... In my opinion it was a mess.

The book was best and I very much encourage you to read it if you liked THE movie (Fonda version). The writing (narrative) in the book is almost like a character.... IT WAS ABSOLUTELY GREAT!!!!!

The Fonda version was EXCELLENT and I would recommend it to anyone. But this film still did not do perfect justice to the book which I still think was better.

The Clooney version should be taken out and burned. They tried SO hard to copy the Fonda version even to the extent of showing it in black and white like the original. The Clooney version came up WAY short of either the book or the Fonda movie. Americans in our zeal are always trying to improve on things that need NO improvement ... and we generally screw things up when we do. This was a good example of a massive screw up. Keitel and Dreyfuss overacted their parts to the point of silliness. When compared to the cool and professional style of Fonda (The President) and Dan O'Herlihy (Gen. Warren Black) in the 1964 movie they weren't even on the same planet. The subtle acting of most of the characters in the Fonda film actually HEIGHTENED the tension. Dreyfuss was doing everything but somersaults in the bomb shelter apparently not knowing when enough was enough. Though I think Dreyfuss, Keitel and Clooney are superb actors they simply didn't work in this televised live performance ....I couldn't in good conscience recommend this presentation.

The Title 'The Missiles Of October' was a play on the title of the book 'The Guns Of August' by Barbara Wertheim Tuchman which deals with the precipitant events leading to World War I and the enormous tragedy resulting from the inability of the principal player's to diplomatically side-step one of history's most tragic chapters. I was a child at the time of the Cuban missile crisis but I remember clearly the dread we all felt during those tension filled days when literally the fate of the world was hanging in the balance.

'The Missiles Of October' was a Hallmark Hall Of Fame special presentation and was based on Theodore Sorensen's book 'Kennedy' [the chapter entitled 'The Cuban Missile Crisis']. The TV production captured perfectly the story as told by Sorensen, who was part of Kennedy's staff at the time and was present at most of the meetings taking place prior, and subsequent to Kennedy's revelation to the world of America's knowledge of the Russian missiles in Cuba and our intent to have them removed.

I HIGHLY recommend this film as one of the most riveting stories you will ever see ... fascinating, mesmerizing, haunting, and would have made great fiction if it were not ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

This is absolutely beyond question the worst movie I have ever seen. It is so bad in fact that I plan on renting it again as soon as I can find it. This movie makes 'Plan 9 From Outer Space' look like an Oscar contender. Just LOOKING at the actors makes me want to laugh out loud. I cannot say enough bad things about this movie. It's awfulness aproaches perfection.

The plot is based on a terrorist attack with a nuclear weapon in San Francisco (I think). That's as far as I can go ... I am laughing too hard. I know it shouldn't be funny but ..... *LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL*

MOVE OVER ED WOOD !!!

Regard's *DATo*

I try not to spill my guts too often but when I do .... well....

I have read in these comments with gaping jaw how people actually think Winona Rider would have played a better daughter to the Don in 'Godfather III' than Sophia Coppola. I mean common are you guys kidding ? I love Winona Rider as an actress but ..... gimme a break here PUH-LEEEEASE !

Sofia Coppola got a bad rap in GodfatherIII from day one. I happen to be an American of Secilian parents and Secilian upbringing. I think she was PERFECTLY cast as the don's daughter. Since she is Francis Ford Coppola's daughter we are to assume that she was placed in the movie as a result of blatant nepotism .... WELL I DON'T AGREE ... I think F. F. Coppola has a pretty good idea of what he is doing and has proven that with his track record. He brought many many personal idea's to the filming of the original Godfather movie which enriched Puzo's story tremendously without altering it one iota. As I recall Coppola's wife designed the entire wedding segment in 'The Godfather' ... I have been to a LOT of Italian weddings and I challenge ANYONE to tell me that those scenes weren't PERFECT representations. I think F.F. Coppola hit a home run by casting his daughter in this film !

Sofia Coppola played that part in Godfather III and represented her character as well as it could have been presented. To give you an example of how stupidly other's would cast a film ... did you know that people in the industry actually argued that Robert Redford and Charles Bronson be considered for the role of Michael in Godfather I ???

If you MUST knock something then knock the Connie Carleone character. In the first two movies Connie Carleone Rizzi was an Italian American. In 'Godfather III' she becomes an American Italian. Talia Shire's acting was, as always, superb but she was way out of character (script knock here not knocking Talia) in Godfather III when you compare this character to the same character in first two movies.

Everything about this movie works for me, from the beauty of the story itself to the artistry of the inter-woven subplots, beautiful imagery, music and cast selection. 'The Red Violin' is a remarkable epic history of a musical instrument binding both the past to the present as well as the spirits of the participants along the journey.

The movies' mysteries are revealed slowly and poetically in a precisely authored meter spanning the violin's birth, journey, and "rebirth". The violin's precise blending of art and mechanical perfection mocks both Cesca's bones and amulets as well as Morritz's "mass spec" and and organic evaluation's to stand apart as something indefinable which soars above and survives Prince's, Cultural Revolutions, attempts to destroy it and finally - attempts to possess it. Morritz is the only one who understands, with true unselfish love, the tragedy and travesty of allowing the vilolin's nobility to be bartered like a slave on the platform into the clutches of auctioned greed.

I recommend this movie to people of passion and lover's of beauty. Over analyzing critics and nit picker's would would be better served by the movie "pi" or "Eraser Head" for this movie's meaning is as much beyond their scope as The Red Violin's value was beyond Mr. Ruselsky's.