Reviews

As with so many of the reviews I've read, I went into this, skeptical of the movie itself, but fully expecting the extraordinary talent of Tom Hanks to completely make it. And as with so many other reviewers, I was disappointed, though not by Hanks himself.

The movie lacked a sense of self. I think that Tom Tykwer was attempting to establish some sort of whimsical rhythm to the story, to draw humor out of the monotonous, and to utilize Hanks' acting chops in a manner similar to Wes Anderson's Grand Budapest Hotel with Ralphe Fiennes. However where as Wes Anderson handles such a movie with the delicate and meticulous approach of a true artist, Tykwer missed his mark entirely, and the whole movie played with a sense of directorial and writing laziness.

The formulaic elements of this movie were evident throughout. 1) Pressure at work for Hanks' character so we feel some sort of deadline. 2) Daughter's tuition bills (because apparently the only way she can go to college is if he pays out of pocket) so we know the stakes are high. 3) Health concerns for Hanks, which I initially thought would be some sort of personal dilemma situation, but turned out to just be a device to get him to meet the love interest. 4) unlikely cross-cultural romance develops. 5) The actual titular "hologram" turns out to not even be important, is really only one scene of the movie, and even after the big IT pitch ultimately fails, we see that nothing particularly (or remotely) bad happens.

The movie was really a series of scenes, that were as predictable as they were disappointing. The repeated waking up late, showering, and getting in the old car with his driver (Alexander Black, who is the movie's only truly compelling character, and extremely well acted), and ultimately achieving nothing at the presentation site - became very taxing. There was no element of "can you believe this is happening again" instead, as Hanks' character goes out and parties the night before, I just began to roll my eyes as the inevitability of this time filling sequence looms.

Hanks himself did very well with what he was given, and I the only marks I hold against him are for taking a movie with the potential to go so wrong given the generally uninteresting script. Even still, I think, as I said before, in the hands of a different director, we could have had a much more enjoyable movie on our hands.

I feel like I'm all over the place here. Ultimately I think the entire directorial approach was rather vapid and uninspired.

I have seen this movie three times already in about a six-week period. Twice by myself. It was amazing, and if you have not seen it, I strongly recommend you just stop reading and go rent it.

The character of Ewa was so believable it was the single greatest relief that I have experienced in the box office in the past year. So often that character in a parallel - lesser movie - would have been naive from the get go, falling for Joaquin Phoenix's character's lies, and ultimately making it easier to justify her actions on screen. But this was an incredibly well developed character in Ewa, she was bright and tough, and saw through his bull crap, even telling him to his face that she knew what he was up to. She had a conflicted road, justifying her actions, and the immorality that became her life truly seemed to eat her alive.

Let me summarize by saying that the movie has an incredible script.

The character of Jeremy Renner was playful and fun to watch, and I was heartbroken for Ewa at the end of his role. I really had wanted him to take her away out west, even though it would have ended the story, I just wanted her to be happy, that's how perfect it was.

Joaquin, Joaquin, Joaquin... What can I say about him. I really am conflicted. Part of me thinks that he was masterful in this role, but I really am not sure. He certainly "pulled it off" but I am still deliberating as to if I believed all of his personality quirks, or if I would have believed him more if he had taken a more minimalist approach. Certainly a good performance, but the jury is out as to whether it was as genius as many are claiming.

It has been difficult to get this far into the review without mentioning Marion Cotillard, but I wanted to save the best for last. Obvious note: She is beautiful. Perhaps the most stunning and striking woman in the world in my opinion, and every time she is on scene it is easy to be swept away just by her appearance. That having been said, as always, Marion delivered what is possibly the best performance that I have seen since Tom Hanks in "Castaway", or D.D. Lewis in "There Will Be Blood". The pain and conflict that her character was burdened with was entirely believable in Marion's portrayal. I found myself wanting to be able to jump into the scene to save her from her plight many times. I do not know what it is about Marion Cotillard, but when she takes on a role, it appears to be the most natural donning of another's personality possible, every single time, and in the character of Ewa there was enough depth to make use of her incredible diversity. Ewa has replaced Stephanie from "Rust and Bone" as my new favorite Marion Cotillard portrayal. What an artist.

I have the movie on blue ray, and I am certain it will be one of the timeless films for me, that I will watch the rest of my life, right up there with "A Beautiful Mind", "Catch Me If You Can", "Midnight In Paris" and "Legends of the Fall".

I literally had no idea what I was watching when I turned this on, having selected it on the sole fact that it had Marion Cotillard. two and a half hours later, I cannot believe how wonderful this movie was.

The acting was so completely and entirely natural. Any one of the characters could have been someone that I know, and many of them reminded me of people that I know well. The dynamic, which is sometimes trying and stressful, between the various combinations of friends is so perfectly captured, I am blown away.

This is a story about friendship and trials, and its true the one sentence synopsis of the story would probably sound quite boring, but this movie was far from it. Two and a half hours blew by without me even noticing.

There were some truly funny scenes - the guy cursing at the rice - and the ending had me crying for about 10 minutes straight (though this could be because of Cotillard, I can't hardly see her cry without crying myself).

I know this review probably seems scatter-brained. I just really want to tip my hat to the amazing actors, screenwriters, and director who made this.

Incredible awful piece of film. I was coerced into watching this by my girlfriend who is obsessed with Blake from a TV show she likes, so its not like I went into this with high expectations. But this garbage managed to drop beyond the depths of low expectations into abysses usually reserved for movies starring Colin Farrell or that British guy who invents lies. That having been said, I want to lead into this by telling you to not take my word for it, see this movie for yourself. Just utilize the buddy system when watching and make sure you take turns checking each-other's vitals and be prepared to administer hypodermics of adrenaline to keep the old hearts pumping steady.

Right off the bat I was driven nuts by the terribly written prologue voice-over which was trying so hard to be profound, but really came off just obscene. I mean we are talking some of the worst writing that has made its way to the box office. Spoiler alert: within the first ninety seconds of the movie you will get to hear Blake Lively say "I have orgasms... He has wargasms..." I would like to think that the writers lost a bet or something, but I digress. Well this nonsense continues on through the entire movie! Its like they had this movie made and someone was like "I don't think Blake Lively is ruining this project enough yet, can we have her talk even when she's not in the scene?".

Okay and one other thing... You mean to tell me that after all of the previews (which were basically the prologue minus the wargasm comment) eluding to some pretty intense sex scenes, we are not even going to see Blake nude? What the hell is this bull crap? That would have justified her place in that movie at least a little bit, and I would have found it easily to forgive the infuriating stupidity that her character portrayed through the next two and a half hours.

That's right, did I mention that this movie was over two hours long? So for over a twelfth of my day, I had to watch this utterly unbelievable story play out about two guys sharing a girl that they both loved and then basically trying to get her back. There was about a 50 minute part about 60% through where I felt like the characters themselves didn't know what was going on in the story.

Finally, the two guys in the movie? Taylor Kitsch and the other one? Did someone even tell them that they were supposed to be pretending to be other people? I have never been so bored watching people's mouths move and then hearing words fall out in my life. Never.

I give this 2 out of 10 because they spent a lot of money on it.

So this movie was really not too bad... And by that I mean that as I watched it, I kept having to wipe the bile away as it dripped down my chin, while simultaneously pinching myself to make sure that I hadn't died and gone to hell.

So wow. Really just mind blown. So we've got this guy, this supposed ex- womanizer (a point that was as un-believable as it was useless... We're talking serious beer gut with a kind of serial killery look) who apparently takes his job as a insurance fraud investigator very seriously, to the point of breaking and entering and lying to old women.

Then this guy, this fellah', if you will: he hooks up with Mena Suvari using his culture as a lure. Lucky guy I guess.

After his dry and slow relationship had sufficiently bored me to death, this fellah' is tricked by his employers and then drugged, brought to a bridge and finally dropped in the water with some chains on his wrists, and apparently a paperclip or key in his pocket. All this to leave him framed for some murders that they - his employers - had to commit to silence people for asking questions about the massive quantities of bath salts that they were shipping through the town in broad daylight (we're talking van loads).

Fast forward one year and we have an equally unattractive, boring and useless character as the investigator, but this one is a writer who is investigating the murders of the town's people. This writer pays $10,000 a month for his condo, and ends up getting pretty deep into the investigation, finding out some pretty dark secrets and all until finally he has to save the girl (Mena Suvari), kill the 5 or 6 thugs, and is finally saved himself by Tom Arnold in a helicopter with a sniper rifle.

Then, in an M. Night Shyamalan styled twist we find out that he was dead the whole time! No.... No... That wasn't it... It turned out that the writer guy WAS the investigator from the beginning. But he's spent a year training and getting money from somewhere. Its like the Count of Monte Cristo if it was written by a greeter from Wal Mart, which I think is actually the case after finding out that our lead actor who's name is Average McAverageson, was not only the writer, but also produced the movie himself! Bravo sir. You get one star because IMDb is kind enough to have that be the minimum.

My theory: The guy who wrote and acted in this movie really liked Mena Suvari (and I mean, who doesn't. She's absolutely gorgeous), and spent 2.5 million dollars so that he could spend four hours filming a scene with her in a bra.

I am extremely surprised, reading through some of the other reviews - so many people seemed to like this movie, and I just don't see it at all. It was awful.

None of the characters shown in the first half hour of the movie were alive for the last fifteen minutes of it. They did a complete cast rotation, which made so little sense as I watched this train wreck, that I considered closing up my laptop in frustration.

There were scenes in the movie (like the sermon, and the explanation for the trumpet soundings at the end) that went on so long that it became comical. The screenwriters took some serious indulgences during the crafting of this script, and not artistically either. Just lengthy monologues which served little purpose besides tying the flimsy plot together.

In the absence of fractions I give this movie a begrudging 1 out of 10, though it really doesn't deserve that.