Reviews

Pierre Goldman is a complex and fascinating character, a French leftist, a small time criminal and an intellectual.

PG was a Polish Jew born in France towards end of WWII. His parents belonged to the resistance group and separated after the war with his mother, a staunch Communist who returned to Poland.

PG was kicked out of various high schools but managed to graduate from Sorbonne. He didn't join '68 student movements but went to Cuba instead and fought as a guerrilla in Venezuela and robbed a bank! Upon returning to Paris he participated in several small time robberies and was arrested with charges of murdering 2 female pharmacists in a drug store which he vehemently denied. He argued on his own behalf during the trial against the wishes of his defence attorneys.

He famously proclaimed that he died the day he was born!

This movie is fundamentally about that '76 trial in totality, a rousing and intense 1hr 46min film.

The film was strongly directed by Cedric Kahn, an actor-director and starring powerfully by Arich Worthalter as Goldman and Arthur Harari as one of his defence attorneys who also happened to be Jewish but declined to use it as a means to induce sympathy from the judges.

It was a sensational trial which attracted many celebrities and intellectuals at the time in supports to Goldman, particularly during that anti-authority anti-police political climate.

What made this film extraordinary is the superb casting from the leads down to the extras who looked real and authentic down to their appearances. The filmmakers probably had conducted extensive rehearsals which resulted this intense and fascinating courtroom drama. I'm not certain that if the script was based on the actual courtroom transcripts but it was very well written as well.

For more details on Pierre Goldman and the case, you may refer to Pierre Goldman on Wikipedia.

Recommended, as a courtroom drama based on actual events.

Watched first 2 episodes of Ripley on Netflix. I was first impressed by the pristine black n white cinematography and production design depicting NYC in the '60s. At the end of episode 2, I lost interest.

Talented Mr. Ripley written by Patricia Highsmith was published in the mid '50s.

The book was first made by Rene Clement into Purple Noon starring Alain Delon and Maurice Ronet which remains a classic.

Theatre 2nd adaptation was by Anthony Minghella in 1999 staring Matt Damon as Ripley and Jude Law as Dickie Greenleaf.

It was well made and entertaining.

Ripley the new mini series was created, written and directed by the prolific film/TV series writer/director Steven Zaillian.

Theatre reviews are mixed. Some complained its 'glacial' plot development.

It is possible that the book might not have enough content to fill an 8 episode mini series.

That being said, the problem with this Ripley is the casting. Firstly, both actors for Ripley and Dickie are too old for their roles. They supposed to be in the mid-20's while Andrew Scott and Johnny Flynn are weathered looking in their mid to late 30's.

As Ripley, Andrew Scott is a good actor who first appeared as Moriaty in Sherlock the TV series, but he lacks dual charisma as the innocent looking Ripley but a cold, cunning psychopath in reality. Johnny Flynn the British actor looks nothing like a care free rich boy who supposed to be the idol of Ripley for his wealth and sex appeal. The actor has a bit speech impediment, bloated face and looking much uncomfortable in his role. Dakota Fanning as Dickie friend Marge who's supposed to have an on n off again relationship with Dickie also looked ill fitting and too old.

Talented Mr. Ripley the book has a major flaw. After the demise of Dickie, Ripley went around Italy impersonating Dickie and siphoning off his money. He might get by in Italy in the early '50s but readers might wonder unless these 2 characters have resemblance. Maybe that's why Hitchcock filmed Stranger on the Train instead.

Another oddity of Ripley is the casting of a woman Eliot Sumner as Freddie Miles who was played by Philip Seymour Hoffman in the earlier version. This time Ripley dragged his feet down the stairs with his head banging on the steps. I don't remember how Matt Damon did in The Talented Mr. Ripley.

The series was filmed in beautiful locales in the isle of Capri standing in for Atrani.

I looked forward to watching this film because I enjoyed Sarah Polley's previous directorial efforts like Away from Her & Take This Waltz.

She managed to mount this major film with an all female star cast with wide screen indicating her filmmaking clout and entering into major league.

The film is based on a book about the abuse of women members of a religious cult in Bolivia in 2010. It is 2hr long with dense dialogue between the women like a play showing the women contemplating whether to Stay, to Fight, or to Leave, without a trace of men murdering or raping them present.

Probably Polley the writer followed too closely to the history or the book. If the film were based like the book filming in Bolivia with the local professional or non-professional actors like a documentary, it may work better. Or, push back the time line towards the turn of 20th century say in Nova Scotia, it may also work better. In the end, the story may only suited for a play.

A Korean family of 4 moving to rural Arkansas to fulfil the wish of the stubborn father to becoming a farmer during the 80's. The film is beautifully made with good acting from most of the actors, young and old. I suppose there's only so much autobiographical story to tell about the farmer father and the struggling mother so the large portion of the film focuses on the two children and their visiting maternal grandmother. A well executed two hour family movie but failed to leave much impression to this viewer.

This is a film about a father who make every effort trying to claim back his two children when his wife is hospitalised due to poverty. It shows the extreme poverty in some of the rural areas in the Balkan while showing the failure of its government, federal and local alike in providing basic humanity to its citizens. The film is well made with excellent performances especially the lead actor.

I was pleasantly surprised by this beautifully written, directed, filmed and acted film which only clocked in merely 64mins. I'll look forward to seeing more of Hong's films.

I sat through watching episode 1 thinking, have we seen it all before? A team of scientists marooned in the artic with communication cut off and began dying off one by one? Except this time several of the team members speak Swedish with subtitles and the viewers need subtitles when they speak English. Supposedly the first episode has to pour everything in to sustain viewer's interests. Not this one. The impressions from this 1st episode for this viewer is a low budget TV sci-fi series with a most unknown cast armed with a poorly written script, uninspired direction, sloppy acting and filmed in a palette bordering on black and white. It's a pass.

I watched a lot of movies. I've seldom come across a revenge movie so poorly written and directed. I struggled for an hour then gave up.

Those who gave high ratings probably only had watched 2 episodes acted and directed by Jason Bateman. Starting episode 3, it is as if no one knows how to carry on with an old Stephen King carbon copy story. I struggled to finish watching the remaining hoping something new or exciting to happen. No luck. No story. No scare. Just boredom. Probably the worst TV series that HBO has tagged its name on. Shame on you wasting your viewers' time!

Arguably one of the best movie about heroin addition. A powerful drama with bleak winter NYC location filming. Heart wrenching performances by a stellar cast. Tony Franciosa has never been better. Remain unforgettable.

Infamous, queer, a blood mess of a revisionist version of the Kelly gang.

Yes, it is not a biography about Mr. Rogers, but you learned a lot about this unique and beloved TV personality for young audiences.

The first half of the movie was excellent. It sagged a little half way through. Towards the end, it picked up again, but not reaching the level of the first part.

Tom Hanks was well cast and Mathew Ryes met his challenge well. There were a lot of speaking-to-our-hearts moments from this well written script. Once again, Director Mirelle Heller proved that she's a force to be recon with after her excellent 'Will You Ever Forgive Me?'

It is a movie to bring us back to the bygone and sadly missed period, and also reaffirms our hope and love for each other and ourselves.

This is one of the top rated film of the recent months. I went into it with higher expectations. True, it is funny and dark, with an engaging ensemble cast. Daniel Craig's southern detective didn't really shine. None of the large suspected knives out-ers were likeable. The one who shines is Anna de Armas, the young Cuban actress who played the maid. The movie is entertaining but seems trying a bit too hard to prove the point.

I struggled to finish this movie headlining by 4 established and well regarded actors. The movie is Sipo to be based on the Booker short-listed book whose author was also involved in the screenplay. The movie started lighthearted but never a moment sounded like from that period. I wonder what's in the mind of its producers and financiers who green-lited this movie and what the 4 principal stars saw that made them sign on such wasteful effort? Someone ought to shoot these two sucker/Sisters Bros early on to save us from the viewing miscery.

This is basically a 2 character play about 2 lighthouse keepers on a desolate coastline somewhere in North America. Loneliness and one of the characters' past caught up on him resulting a series of horrific fantasies. The film format was 4x4 or 4x3 aspects, in luminous black and white. Technically the movie was very good, while Robert Pattison gave an excellent performance. Both actors endured a lot of hardships while making this movie. The same can be said for this viewer. It was an intense and gruelling 2hr watch. The ending was enigmatic and disappointing. What's inside the light? What's the significance of the opening of 'the door'?

Meditative, life/earth affirming, well-written and directed by James Gray, firmly held together by the ever-strong Brad Pitt. A satisfying movie watching experience.

This film is part human drama, part thriller. Highly original and inventive. One of the best and most unique film I've seen during the past year.

I agree 90% of pearldiver's Nov 2018 review. Rami Malek is a rising TV film actor but his physique and trademark acting mannerisms are not suited for the well built and dynamism of Freddie Mercury. Nevertheless, Malek made a valiant effort to play this pivotal role. As for the movie, the script is poorly and loosely written. It went all over the place but offered no drama or substance. The direction is uninspired and pedestrian at best. Some of the acting borders on caricature and cringe making while the makeup is horrendous. The music of Queen saved the movie.

Few filmmakers are able to jam so much stories under 1 hour 30 min including art, romance and history while telling a heart breaking romance performed by 2 appealing and sensitive actors. It is also one of the most beautifully filmed black and white films. A timely reminder of history vs our current state of the world.

This is another film from UK about the struggle of rual farmers trying to make a living. In the case it is sheep herders of Yorkshire.

Ruth Wilson plays a daughter who returns to her family farm after the death of her father. She tries to reassume her farm life while dealing with her brother for the inheritance.

While Wilson gave a more controlled and internal performance, it is Mark Stanley who played the troubled brother who truly shone.

Normally one would not expect much happening in this type of low-budget inde dramas.

In the case it is the ending that proves less satisfying. And way too many shots towards the barn door opened towards the landscape.

Parents tell their kids they are special. Kids feel they are bored with their comfortable lives and searching to make their lives 'special' but without a moral compass.

This is true life causionary tale and not a caper film which some of the viewers were disappointed.

This is the second film by the writer/director of the impressive documentary 'The Imposter' which I had seen.

This docu-drama was ingeniously executed, well produced and acted by an ensemble cast including the real individuals who were involved in the story.

This is one of the best film of 2018.

I finally got around to view this acclaimed HBO mini-series on DVDs.

This mini/series is well produced and mounted with excellent production design with Tom Hooper as the director and paved his way to 'Les Miserables', the most recent adaptation as a musical.

My doubts are about the casting. Is Paul Giamati a suitable cast as John Adams, one of America's founding father and the 2nd president?

There's no doubt that Giamati had given one of his most committed and forceful performances, but still, he could no surrender his trademark acting mannerisms.

There are many scenes between him and the actor who played Thomas Jefferson. It is apparent that any underplaying of such prestigious historical drama would be much preferred.

Credits must be given to Laura Linney who played Adams long suffering wife.

I am watching the final episode with the feeling that was it entirely necessary to include the final unremarkable years of that revered statesman John Adams.