Reviews

I am guessing that these other comments refer to the 'dubbed', English version of the film. I saw the original french language version, many years ago while in France on holiday. In their version the English characters speak french, with wonderfully over the top English accents. It lent a great sense of the English/French relationship and I think got a lot closer to the Gosciny-Uderzo feel for the story and characters. If you ever get a chance to see the french version it's a whole different experience.

I am guessing that these other comments refer to the 'dubbed', English version of the film. I saw the original french language version, many years ago while in France on holiday. In their version the English characters speak french, with wonderfully over the top English accents. It lent a great sense of the English/French relationship and I think got a lot closer to the Gosciny-Uderzo feel for the story and characters. If you ever get a chance to see the french version it's a whole different experience.

Sorry but I have to say this film was truly awful. A repeat of the Thomas Crown affair, which was only good because of the originality of the 1960's script. Yes Ms Hayek does seem to get a lot of top and bottom shots, I wonder why that is? And Mr Brosnan squaring up to the physically inferior Mr Harrelson.

Plainly the scene that said it all for me was when Mr FBI is getting some TLC from that Barbados copper, crap accent, and they repeat the scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark. The one where Mr Ford is getting TLC from Ms Allen on the pirate boat, when Mr Ford is pointing to the bits of his face that hurt and Ms Allen is kissing them.

So this movie has absolutely no imagination in the script. The acting is non-existent as the performers seem only to be massaging their ego's. Oh and that bloke from Neighbours the Aussie soap, as the ships captain, what accent was his meant to be? And the best part is, with no expensive sets, CG effects, crashing cars etc, this film would have been very cheap to make. And will make stacks of money. Like Mr Paul Zbyszewski's other production effort "The Weakest Link" what a talent! Sadly the rating scale does not go to Zero....

My summary is no reflection on the current state of affairs in the world. More, that it shows my feeling that films like Taegukgi and Saving Private Ryan should be shown to young people in their early teens as part of the school curciullum, history perhaps, to show them what real close combat, death, destruction, disruption, loss, hatred, emotion, blood, guts, limbs, tears, sweat, fear and sadness is generated by wars. The UK schools shows films for sex education and even films showing animal slaughter, which drove my sister, and I'm sure a lot of other young people to stop eating meat. This film does the job very, very, well for illustrating the immeasurable 'pain' of war.

This was my first Korean film and I was extremely impressed. I completely agree with the comments of Phillip Brander, posted 2 Feb 2004. And am glad to report that the subtitles, to me at least, appeared to be a lot better when I saw it in July 2004.

I would hope maybe that this goes onto get some more international recognition. And in turn get more recognition for the war.

8.25/10 (with better editing I would go up to 9)

I can't wait to see what the next epic will be....

As is explained in the prologue to the film, it is based on a true story, although some names, situations and facts have been changed or added. The addition of any facts I feel were probably few, as the film wanted to give a sense of the unknown. The use of historical french newsreel footage throughout gives an partial documentary feel to the film, yet the fine direction by Eric Rohmer, editing and quality of acting draws you straight back into the story every time.

I came away from seeing this film at the Hong Kong Film Festival 2004 with many thoughts. The film has been very well written as a pre-World War II drama/thriller. With many twists and turns in the plot, most of them between the lead characters, Fiodor a 'white russian' (a russian against Joseph Stalins communist ideals) and his greek wife Arsinoe, who live together in Paris, the russian man being 'in exile'.

This is the kind of film that I could watch a hundred times and always come out at the end with different opinion of Fiodor, such is the complexity of the story. The acting benefits well for using actors with applicable nationality/heritage, ie Fiodor, russian, played by Serge Renko and Arsinoe, greek, played by Katerina Didaskalu. Giving the accent the right 'edge', especially in the case of Serge Renko, as the characters speak mainly french in the film. Serge also gives a proud russian 'stiffness' to his character making his behaviour very creditable.

The locations selected for the filming were well chosen and the set's well thought out. Some people may find this film a little faltering, but to me it felt as if the screenplay writer wanted to interfere as little as possible with the original true-life source material. Leaving the viewer to make up their own mind.

An entertaining film that I would watch again, if only to try and make up my mind about Fiodor. Watch it, think about it and then watch it again is my advice.

Rating 8.5-9/10

I saw this film at the Hong Kong International Film Festival 2004 and enjoyed it. There I've said it, only the second person to post a positive review for this film. Allow me to explain....

I don't consider this film to be boring, unless you are trying to compare it to the latest digitally blurred, DTS surround, multi million dollar blockbuster. You are missing the point of this film. It's about reality! When you next come out of the cinema or leave the TV with it's DVD surround system, having gorged on Hollywoods finest, go outside, get on a bus/train/plane. Take a seat and really observe those people around you. Then remember the characters in this film and you will notice that, lo and behold, parents do speak to their children in the way that Leonor Silveira speaks to her daughter. And that her daughter, played by Filipa de Almeida, saying over and over "Why is that.....?" is a true reflection of real life.

The interruptions to the history lessons of the mother, by the Greek Orthodox priest and the Portugese actor are also totally plausible and well observed by both actors and director together. As a 10 year old on a family holiday to historic Italy, having the same history lessons as shown in the film, I too bumped into a british actor/entertainer. He was on holiday with his wife in Rome, when my father asked him if he was in fact an actor. He said that he was, politely introduced his wife and shook hands with myself and my sisters, leaving us gobsmacked to have met a 'real' star.

As for the performances of the euro-stars in this film, again I say look at real life. I live in Hong Kong where 7 million of the population speak cantonese as their first language. In work and social situations both the chinese and westerners hold multi-lingual conversations. And I have been in situations in France and elsewhere in europe, when converstaions take place in more than one language. And yes, they are 'disjointed', but they do exist and occur a lot more often than people think.

Finally, the film itself. It is easy to watch and enjoy. The progress may seem a little 'regimental', but after all a day consists of a sunrise and a sunset. So for this film to punctuate each destination with a boat departure and the bow of the ship plowing the waves, does move things along. The ending was a bit short and sharp, but still reflected the style of the rest of the film in its realism. No long drawn out scenes of pandemonium or touching 'overacted' farewells.

So Hollywood please take note of this film, it may not pay big money, it may not get the sensive receptors buzzing. But, it shows realism, a flare for observation, and some boring bit's. Real life is like that, sorry if that is a shock to any celluloid junkies out there.

Rating 7.5/10

I watched this film recently at the Hong Kong Int Film Fest and found it, as stated, to be honest and touching. Honest, from the point of view that the story is dealing with religious/social feelings and 'obligations' in late 60's Belgium, and I'm sure they would apply to other areas of Europe at the same time. The fact that the family is coping with an alcoholic father/husband and the whole community knows about his habit is also very honest.

Some of the more touching parts of the film are the daughters attitude to her forthcoming holy communion and her imagination of what communion means for her 'relationship' with God. Also, the portrayal of how children behave when growing up, the telling of a secret, for example is well observed.

Not having seen any other films from Belgium, I cannot comment on whether it merited a nomination for the Academy Awards over any other film produced in 2003. But, what I can say is that the film has nothing to be ashamed of. It has treated the issues sensitively and honestly. Giving a good insight into the attitudes of the era.

This film was entertaining to watch. 7.5/10