Datasets:

DDDDZQ

/

imdb_reviews

like 0

An uplifting beauty.

tt0308644

Some may call this epic tale of finding happiness in the most unexpected places to be too 'cheesy' or overly sentimental, but I'm inclined to disagree. In this day and age of modern cinema where every week there are three new films released that are gritty, hard-hitting and feature devastatingly pessimistic finales it's a wonder to find a film like Finding Neverland. Something so euphoric, uplifting and purely joyous. Especially when I've been hitting such a brutal case of depression, a film as optimistic as this was the perfect thing to get my mood in a state of happiness for the first time in as long as I can remember. Forster creates a fantastic fairy tale dream of one man's loneliness being cured by a wonderful family, who are full of their own flaws.The story centers around playwright J.M. Barrie, played by Johnny Depp in the most perfect decision of his career, who is suffering a terrible case of mediocrity in his writing abilities. This lack of ability seems to stem from troubles at home where his wife Mary (the increasingly diverse Radha Mitchell) barely notices his existence and is far more focused on their social status than their marital one. In a wonderful meeting of chance, Barrie encounters the Llewelyn Davies family at the park one afternoon. This chance meeting turns into the luckiest experience of Mr. Barrie's life and also happens to be quite the blissful experience for the Davies' as well. We are then taken on a journey of watching J.M. burst out of his writer's block with the help of this beautifully imaginative family, and see that they needed his help just as much as he needed their's.After a devastating loss of the families male lead, Sylvia Llewelyn Davies (played masterfully by Kate Winslet) is left with four boys all to herself. Her slowly decreasing medical condition only makes matters worse and the film is filled with a constant state of approaching dread. Of course, since the film is perfectly magical, even as she passes on it's the beautiful imaginative hearts of Barrie and her four boys that help Sylvia leave this world in a complete state of happiness. With this wonderful relationship established between this family and this married man, we do get glimpses of the obvious tolls it takes on everyone's life. Barrie's marriage falls apart, he receives criticism from the community at large for the nature of his relationship with Sylvia and even the boys and Sylvia's mother constantly tries to bring the spirit of the family down. But it's the magic of these characters and this story that carry the picture on and keep joyous spirit alive.Another interesting subplot to the film is the relationship between James and one of the Davies boys in particular, this boy being Peter (the inspiration for Barrie's title character Peter Pan, played by relative newcomer Freddie Highmore). Peter seems to be the one who struggles the most over the loss of his father and the addition of J.M. into the family life is one of painful sorrow and needed relief for him. He struggles with his feelings of James seemingly replacing his father and the lack of respect he gets from adults. This climaxes in a gut-wrenching scene as Peter destroys the faux-stage that the brother's set up in what is a brilliant display of acting from the young Highmore. Ultimately, Barrie takes Peter under his wing and teaches him the magic of imagination and appropriately helps him to find the infamous Neverland which represents the blissful place in your imagination where no harm can come to you.I mentioned it before, but I would like to go back to Depp's fantastic and deservedly Oscar-nominated performance. The genius of Johnny Depp is clearly displayed in his decision to take this subtle and beautiful role after the eccentricity and wild charisma of playing Captain Jack Sparrow. His performance is very reserved, but this in no way makes it any lesser than his other work. In fact, I believe it to be one of the best portrayal's of his entire career and his best work of this decade so far. All of the performances in this sensational film are excellent (Winslet is another one to be remembered) but this truly is Johnny's show. A dynamic feat in what is now surprisingly one of my favorite films.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-599

ur9521536

title: An uplifting beauty. review: Some may call this epic tale of finding happiness in the most unexpected places to be too 'cheesy' or overly sentimental, but I'm inclined to disagree. In this day and age of modern cinema where every week there are three new films released that are gritty, hard-hitting and feature devastatingly pessimistic finales it's a wonder to find a film like Finding Neverland. Something so euphoric, uplifting and purely joyous. Especially when I've been hitting such a brutal case of depression, a film as optimistic as this was the perfect thing to get my mood in a state of happiness for the first time in as long as I can remember. Forster creates a fantastic fairy tale dream of one man's loneliness being cured by a wonderful family, who are full of their own flaws.The story centers around playwright J.M. Barrie, played by Johnny Depp in the most perfect decision of his career, who is suffering a terrible case of mediocrity in his writing abilities. This lack of ability seems to stem from troubles at home where his wife Mary (the increasingly diverse Radha Mitchell) barely notices his existence and is far more focused on their social status than their marital one. In a wonderful meeting of chance, Barrie encounters the Llewelyn Davies family at the park one afternoon. This chance meeting turns into the luckiest experience of Mr. Barrie's life and also happens to be quite the blissful experience for the Davies' as well. We are then taken on a journey of watching J.M. burst out of his writer's block with the help of this beautifully imaginative family, and see that they needed his help just as much as he needed their's.After a devastating loss of the families male lead, Sylvia Llewelyn Davies (played masterfully by Kate Winslet) is left with four boys all to herself. Her slowly decreasing medical condition only makes matters worse and the film is filled with a constant state of approaching dread. Of course, since the film is perfectly magical, even as she passes on it's the beautiful imaginative hearts of Barrie and her four boys that help Sylvia leave this world in a complete state of happiness. With this wonderful relationship established between this family and this married man, we do get glimpses of the obvious tolls it takes on everyone's life. Barrie's marriage falls apart, he receives criticism from the community at large for the nature of his relationship with Sylvia and even the boys and Sylvia's mother constantly tries to bring the spirit of the family down. But it's the magic of these characters and this story that carry the picture on and keep joyous spirit alive.Another interesting subplot to the film is the relationship between James and one of the Davies boys in particular, this boy being Peter (the inspiration for Barrie's title character Peter Pan, played by relative newcomer Freddie Highmore). Peter seems to be the one who struggles the most over the loss of his father and the addition of J.M. into the family life is one of painful sorrow and needed relief for him. He struggles with his feelings of James seemingly replacing his father and the lack of respect he gets from adults. This climaxes in a gut-wrenching scene as Peter destroys the faux-stage that the brother's set up in what is a brilliant display of acting from the young Highmore. Ultimately, Barrie takes Peter under his wing and teaches him the magic of imagination and appropriately helps him to find the infamous Neverland which represents the blissful place in your imagination where no harm can come to you.I mentioned it before, but I would like to go back to Depp's fantastic and deservedly Oscar-nominated performance. The genius of Johnny Depp is clearly displayed in his decision to take this subtle and beautiful role after the eccentricity and wild charisma of playing Captain Jack Sparrow. His performance is very reserved, but this in no way makes it any lesser than his other work. In fact, I believe it to be one of the best portrayal's of his entire career and his best work of this decade so far. All of the performances in this sensational film are excellent (Winslet is another one to be remembered) but this truly is Johnny's show. A dynamic feat in what is now surprisingly one of my favorite films.

Beautiful, charming, heartbreaking and wonderful

tt0308644

FINDING NEVERLAND simply lets Johnny Depp fly from being everybody's best friend in the extremely slick and stylish pirate Jack Sparrow into a mind-opener, writer and failed in success James M. Barrie.Kate Winslet goes from the giggling, weird, mood-swinging Clementine from Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind, into a lost but in the same time cheerful widow Sylvia L. Davies.It's truly a beautiful little masterpiece. FINDING NEVERLAND is such charming, excellent in every way that you simply can't find anything negative about it. It's truly wonderful scenes as Depp's writer character hanging out with the family, trying to get a kite in the air is just so beautiful watching. But FINDING NEVERLAND finds it true class work in it's changes from fantasy and reality, seeing threw the eyes of a mind-unlocking Johnny Depp that sees everything else than we see in happenings. As when the Davies' family's strict grandmother points at one of the small boys, Barrie sees a hook in the old woman's hand and we can clearly see him shaping and creating the character of Captain Hook.Threw all the beautiful scenes and truly inspiring settings, there are nice laughs put between and emotional work on the finest piece of work. Creating great settings as a small house on the county side, a elegant theater - all off course having its special place in the whole movie the picking of locations and moods are really breathtaking.Johnny Depp does one of his best character performances ever, and with fine dialogs and fine poetic sentences threw the movie this can't do anything than be one big, charming beauty in his filmography. The whole idea of making a movie about how the writer of Peter Pan invented and started creating it, it's itself just original and great.James Barrie being a successful writer are having dry times with his pen and paper, making disappointing plays, and with the theater owner Frohman counting 100% on him. While sitting in the park he suddenly bumps into a widow and her boys, this awakes a magic inside him and spending a summer with the family he gets new, incredible ideas and starts writing like never before. Although having problems with his wife, James Barrie realises that he has to put everything in his mind to create this play into something that would become Peter Pan.. STARS: 5/5

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-276

ur1732001

title: Beautiful, charming, heartbreaking and wonderful review: FINDING NEVERLAND simply lets Johnny Depp fly from being everybody's best friend in the extremely slick and stylish pirate Jack Sparrow into a mind-opener, writer and failed in success James M. Barrie.Kate Winslet goes from the giggling, weird, mood-swinging Clementine from Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind, into a lost but in the same time cheerful widow Sylvia L. Davies.It's truly a beautiful little masterpiece. FINDING NEVERLAND is such charming, excellent in every way that you simply can't find anything negative about it. It's truly wonderful scenes as Depp's writer character hanging out with the family, trying to get a kite in the air is just so beautiful watching. But FINDING NEVERLAND finds it true class work in it's changes from fantasy and reality, seeing threw the eyes of a mind-unlocking Johnny Depp that sees everything else than we see in happenings. As when the Davies' family's strict grandmother points at one of the small boys, Barrie sees a hook in the old woman's hand and we can clearly see him shaping and creating the character of Captain Hook.Threw all the beautiful scenes and truly inspiring settings, there are nice laughs put between and emotional work on the finest piece of work. Creating great settings as a small house on the county side, a elegant theater - all off course having its special place in the whole movie the picking of locations and moods are really breathtaking.Johnny Depp does one of his best character performances ever, and with fine dialogs and fine poetic sentences threw the movie this can't do anything than be one big, charming beauty in his filmography. The whole idea of making a movie about how the writer of Peter Pan invented and started creating it, it's itself just original and great.James Barrie being a successful writer are having dry times with his pen and paper, making disappointing plays, and with the theater owner Frohman counting 100% on him. While sitting in the park he suddenly bumps into a widow and her boys, this awakes a magic inside him and spending a summer with the family he gets new, incredible ideas and starts writing like never before. Although having problems with his wife, James Barrie realises that he has to put everything in his mind to create this play into something that would become Peter Pan.. STARS: 5/5

Wonderful Movie

tt0308644

What can I say...is there a word I can use to describe this movie after the end credits are coming on screen...yes there is.WONDERFUL is that word.In a nutshell Finding Neverland shows the audience how the Peter Pan story was created. This movie showed me and anyone that knows anything about acting that Johnny Depp must get an Academy Award for Best Actor sooner or later. Sooner would be better. This movie was wonderfully written and directed from start to finish. Kate Winslet did an excellent job. Johnny Depp, as usual, was superb. He just becomes his character no matter who it may be. Believe it or not though..it wasn't Johnny Depp's acting that I was talking about after the movie(well...a little)but instead it was a young actor that I was seeing for the first time by the name of Freddie Highmore. He appeared very comfortable in the role. He was just as enjoyable to watch as Mr.Depp. Excellent work young Freddie Highmore.If you want to sit down one evening and watch a nice family movie with good acting and story telling...don't bypass Finding Neverland. By the way...if you're a sentimental person...be prepared for the last two/three scenes. Touching is an understatement.Have the tissues ready. I can see a lot of ladies crying during these scenes. Wonderful last scene with Johnny Depp & Freddie Highmore. WONDERFUL!!!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-518

ur4651643

title: Wonderful Movie review: What can I say...is there a word I can use to describe this movie after the end credits are coming on screen...yes there is.WONDERFUL is that word.In a nutshell Finding Neverland shows the audience how the Peter Pan story was created. This movie showed me and anyone that knows anything about acting that Johnny Depp must get an Academy Award for Best Actor sooner or later. Sooner would be better. This movie was wonderfully written and directed from start to finish. Kate Winslet did an excellent job. Johnny Depp, as usual, was superb. He just becomes his character no matter who it may be. Believe it or not though..it wasn't Johnny Depp's acting that I was talking about after the movie(well...a little)but instead it was a young actor that I was seeing for the first time by the name of Freddie Highmore. He appeared very comfortable in the role. He was just as enjoyable to watch as Mr.Depp. Excellent work young Freddie Highmore.If you want to sit down one evening and watch a nice family movie with good acting and story telling...don't bypass Finding Neverland. By the way...if you're a sentimental person...be prepared for the last two/three scenes. Touching is an understatement.Have the tissues ready. I can see a lot of ladies crying during these scenes. Wonderful last scene with Johnny Depp & Freddie Highmore. WONDERFUL!!!

Few Films Captivate the Imagination Quite as Well as this One!

tt0308644

Finding Neverland is a heartfelt film that captivates both the heart and imagination.The film follows the biographical story of "Peter Pan" author J.M. Barrie. The story is about Barrie and how he came up with the idea for "Peter Pan" through his friendship with a widow and her four boys.This film was superbly directed by Marc Forster, who is truly one of the finest young filmmakers in the modern day film industry. Forster was able to deliver a film that was both visually stimulating and truly emotional at the same time. He should be commended in particular for generating such great performances from his remarkable cast, in particular Johnny Depp as J.M. Barrie and Freddie Highmore as Peter. Both actors played their contrasting roles perfectly; Depp as a man who doesn't want to grow up, and Highmore as a child who is growing up way too fast. As well the film's score by Jan Kaczmarek is truly one of the finest I think I have heard in a long time, it's magical tones engross you within each and every scene.Finding Neverland is a highly enjoyable film that is both imaginative and touching at the same time. The film manages to tug on you heartstrings more so than any other film in recent memory. It sweeps you up into Barrie's imagination and never lets you go. This film is definitely one of the finest I think I have seen in a long time.I give Finding Neverland a perfect 10 out of 10!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-610

ur6136793

title: Few Films Captivate the Imagination Quite as Well as this One! review: Finding Neverland is a heartfelt film that captivates both the heart and imagination.The film follows the biographical story of "Peter Pan" author J.M. Barrie. The story is about Barrie and how he came up with the idea for "Peter Pan" through his friendship with a widow and her four boys.This film was superbly directed by Marc Forster, who is truly one of the finest young filmmakers in the modern day film industry. Forster was able to deliver a film that was both visually stimulating and truly emotional at the same time. He should be commended in particular for generating such great performances from his remarkable cast, in particular Johnny Depp as J.M. Barrie and Freddie Highmore as Peter. Both actors played their contrasting roles perfectly; Depp as a man who doesn't want to grow up, and Highmore as a child who is growing up way too fast. As well the film's score by Jan Kaczmarek is truly one of the finest I think I have heard in a long time, it's magical tones engross you within each and every scene.Finding Neverland is a highly enjoyable film that is both imaginative and touching at the same time. The film manages to tug on you heartstrings more so than any other film in recent memory. It sweeps you up into Barrie's imagination and never lets you go. This film is definitely one of the finest I think I have seen in a long time.I give Finding Neverland a perfect 10 out of 10!

The young kid of the cinema is ramming his way up to the top

tt0308644

Pirates are Johnny Depp's curse for ever and even when he becomes a Lord in late Victorian London he manages do choose the author of Peter Pan and thus gets some Captain Hook to shake his hand. But his role is a composition of the best and most difficult type, the type of stunts you don't need a stuntman to do in your place. The film is a real gem for two main reasons. First of all because it is a love story in a time when love was some kind of forbidden goods in the aristocracy. And the love story is so pure, so beyond any doubt that he avoids melodrama when death decides to play his own game with that Johnny who invades the widowed mother's life a little bit too much. Dramatic but not tear-wringing. And the second reason of the beauty of that film is also the reason why it remains feeling intense without being heart rending or heart breaking. The whole film is centered on a bunch of boys and brothers and Peter is so young that we are amazed by his being so present, so good, so mature in his performance. He does not miss a word, a sentiment or an emotion and his so deep acting touches us a lot more than the obstinacy of Death to come and take away what he considers his owed property. And all the rest is nothing but the clothing and beefing up of that power. Johnny Depp becomes a real prodigy in this composition and he looks so serious that we forget the genial clown he is quite often in other films. Peter Pan is a legend and his author is like the Peter of Heavens, the guide and majordomo of our imagination who can introduce us to what real spiritual happiness can be. And we discover we are still able to dream because somewhere the film wakes up the child or even the baby who has never died completely in our life of needs and wants and remembers the cradle that a motherly hand was rocking in a regular and powerful rolling that has inspired our most intimate desires as soon as we were big enough to sleep flat on our stomach in an adult bed. Regular and religious rhythm of that rocking. The religion of coming out of the dream to wake up in a sunny world of pure tenderness.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-593

ur3836774

title: The young kid of the cinema is ramming his way up to the top review: Pirates are Johnny Depp's curse for ever and even when he becomes a Lord in late Victorian London he manages do choose the author of Peter Pan and thus gets some Captain Hook to shake his hand. But his role is a composition of the best and most difficult type, the type of stunts you don't need a stuntman to do in your place. The film is a real gem for two main reasons. First of all because it is a love story in a time when love was some kind of forbidden goods in the aristocracy. And the love story is so pure, so beyond any doubt that he avoids melodrama when death decides to play his own game with that Johnny who invades the widowed mother's life a little bit too much. Dramatic but not tear-wringing. And the second reason of the beauty of that film is also the reason why it remains feeling intense without being heart rending or heart breaking. The whole film is centered on a bunch of boys and brothers and Peter is so young that we are amazed by his being so present, so good, so mature in his performance. He does not miss a word, a sentiment or an emotion and his so deep acting touches us a lot more than the obstinacy of Death to come and take away what he considers his owed property. And all the rest is nothing but the clothing and beefing up of that power. Johnny Depp becomes a real prodigy in this composition and he looks so serious that we forget the genial clown he is quite often in other films. Peter Pan is a legend and his author is like the Peter of Heavens, the guide and majordomo of our imagination who can introduce us to what real spiritual happiness can be. And we discover we are still able to dream because somewhere the film wakes up the child or even the baby who has never died completely in our life of needs and wants and remembers the cradle that a motherly hand was rocking in a regular and powerful rolling that has inspired our most intimate desires as soon as we were big enough to sleep flat on our stomach in an adult bed. Regular and religious rhythm of that rocking. The religion of coming out of the dream to wake up in a sunny world of pure tenderness.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines

Finding Yourself

tt0308644

I am not one to warm up to movies centered around themes such as this film. This is not because the idea of adults finding their inner child is ridiculous or immature to me. Its a result of films facing that theme also face a very big challenge on managing to correctly portray a transformation of an adult by children. Also if it actually extremely benefits the adult character in many profound ways. Most of the times films never succeed at this and are done so irresponsibly promoting dangerous styles of living that could be just as hurtful to others around us. Now the major question that is posed then, is why does this film succeed where others do not? What makes this film so precise yet so open? With Johnny Depp as the lead character, James Matthew Barrie, you know he will be ideal for the role of someone inspired by creativity considering the unique feeling Depp can bring to any film. At the outset of the Finding Neverland, Depp's character is in dire straits to not only find himself as a writer but flat out just find himself. Eventually he does succeed at both through the help of three children he befriends whose mother, played by Kate Winslet, is ill. Depp discovers what he had long been missing, imagination and open mindedness. The children bring him that which is throughout is so wonderfully conveyed. His new lifestyle in no way endangers the people around him rather it enables his decisions to be more enlightened and thought out. Yet it still brings him into question. The cast is filled with talent ranging from of course Depp and Winslet as well to Julie Christie and Dustin Hoffman. What the cast does not just play their characters, their characters are embodied by them all the way down to the performances of the kids.Marc Foster takes on this challenge of an adult searching for himself with complete success. The writing and dialog is always engaging as well as the music and all the other technical aspects that go into making a movie. Still, remains the question what sets this film apart from others that attempted to be like it? Unlike other films this film is centered around youth equaling imagination and creativity. Not always is it a must to abide by the rules, maybe not the rule of law but the unwritten rules of being an adult, being a writer or any other sort of unwritten or written rule relating to anything. Nonetheless this must be done at a responsible and safe level which this film never fails to display. These rules can limit our creativity which limits the capabilities of our mind and ultimately drastically decreases the chances at happiness on any pure or genuine level.Too often is youth simply associated with fun, stupidity and meaningless entertainment. It never falls into that trap. What this film shows is that we make meaning of our lives and this should start from our youth but not dissolve as our lives become further complex and self contradictory. Depp shows with his reclaimed youthfulness his life can only go up as does his happiness yet this is unjustifiably rejected by "responsible", "sensible" and "mature" adults. Depp's characters knows they are wrong through his writing and newfound appreciation of life but more importantly the people close to Depp know it and can see it to be true. In this way though, Finding Neverland may give us the key clue on how to find ourself.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-618

ur16117882

title: Finding Yourself review: I am not one to warm up to movies centered around themes such as this film. This is not because the idea of adults finding their inner child is ridiculous or immature to me. Its a result of films facing that theme also face a very big challenge on managing to correctly portray a transformation of an adult by children. Also if it actually extremely benefits the adult character in many profound ways. Most of the times films never succeed at this and are done so irresponsibly promoting dangerous styles of living that could be just as hurtful to others around us. Now the major question that is posed then, is why does this film succeed where others do not? What makes this film so precise yet so open? With Johnny Depp as the lead character, James Matthew Barrie, you know he will be ideal for the role of someone inspired by creativity considering the unique feeling Depp can bring to any film. At the outset of the Finding Neverland, Depp's character is in dire straits to not only find himself as a writer but flat out just find himself. Eventually he does succeed at both through the help of three children he befriends whose mother, played by Kate Winslet, is ill. Depp discovers what he had long been missing, imagination and open mindedness. The children bring him that which is throughout is so wonderfully conveyed. His new lifestyle in no way endangers the people around him rather it enables his decisions to be more enlightened and thought out. Yet it still brings him into question. The cast is filled with talent ranging from of course Depp and Winslet as well to Julie Christie and Dustin Hoffman. What the cast does not just play their characters, their characters are embodied by them all the way down to the performances of the kids.Marc Foster takes on this challenge of an adult searching for himself with complete success. The writing and dialog is always engaging as well as the music and all the other technical aspects that go into making a movie. Still, remains the question what sets this film apart from others that attempted to be like it? Unlike other films this film is centered around youth equaling imagination and creativity. Not always is it a must to abide by the rules, maybe not the rule of law but the unwritten rules of being an adult, being a writer or any other sort of unwritten or written rule relating to anything. Nonetheless this must be done at a responsible and safe level which this film never fails to display. These rules can limit our creativity which limits the capabilities of our mind and ultimately drastically decreases the chances at happiness on any pure or genuine level.Too often is youth simply associated with fun, stupidity and meaningless entertainment. It never falls into that trap. What this film shows is that we make meaning of our lives and this should start from our youth but not dissolve as our lives become further complex and self contradictory. Depp shows with his reclaimed youthfulness his life can only go up as does his happiness yet this is unjustifiably rejected by "responsible", "sensible" and "mature" adults. Depp's characters knows they are wrong through his writing and newfound appreciation of life but more importantly the people close to Depp know it and can see it to be true. In this way though, Finding Neverland may give us the key clue on how to find ourself.

No need for Tinkerbell, this film is simply magical - 91%

tt0308644

For the longest time, I was wary of watching this. It struck me as being quite Oscar-friendly and very much a period chick-flick. Therefore, I'd like to extend my deepest sympathies to "Finding Neverland" and everyone connected with it because this is a sublime picture that is full of zeal and enthusiasm. It is also the first movie I've seen that accurately shows what it is like being a writer (as I am one myself) with glorious flights of fancy that are both wonderful to witness and (at last!) do not detract from the film as a whole.Johnny Depp puts in one of the finest performances in his career as the author of Peter Pan, J.M. Barrie. After his latest play flops in London's West End, Barrie begins a friendship with the four children of Sylvia Llewelyn Davies (Kate Winslet) and finds his inspiration for his next play, a story about a boy who never grows up - "Peter Pan". But the relationship between the Davies' and Barrie puts a tremendous strain on his wife (Radha Mitchell) as well as Sylvia's mother (Julie Christie).It is truly staggering how different Depp is here from his role in "Pirates Of The Caribbean" - here, he is controlled and graceful and his Scottish accent is impeccable. But Depp faces strong competition from the four child actors (Freddie Highmore, Joe Prospero, Nick Roud & Luke Spill) who are also fantastic as the Davies' children. The film also looks superb, with a relentless turn-of-the-century feel for the most part and a surreal dream-like quality during Barrie's flights of fancy when his and the boys' imagination takes over. And while a film based on how a play is written doesn't sound that gripping, it never fails to captivate and hold your attention. My one gripe is that it's a bit too similar to "Shakespeare In Love" but given how extraordinary that film was, that is hardly criticism - indeed, it is mighty praise for a film that surprised and entertained me for every minutes of its duration.I'd happily recommend this film to almost anybody. It's imaginative, emotive and gloriously realised - such a shame that it didn't win more Oscars because this is one of the best films to be released this side of the millennium. It's one of the finest pieces of escapism I've seen and I defy anyone not to feel choked at the end. It's a great date movie as well as fabulous family entertainment, although young children may find their attention wandering. Most of all, it's an intelligent and beautifully produced "writers" movie which, if we're honest, don't come along very often. If you haven't seen it then believe the hype - this is one movie you simply have to see, even if you're not a fan of period dramas (like myself). Depp does it again.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-542

ur3035115

title: No need for Tinkerbell, this film is simply magical - 91% review: For the longest time, I was wary of watching this. It struck me as being quite Oscar-friendly and very much a period chick-flick. Therefore, I'd like to extend my deepest sympathies to "Finding Neverland" and everyone connected with it because this is a sublime picture that is full of zeal and enthusiasm. It is also the first movie I've seen that accurately shows what it is like being a writer (as I am one myself) with glorious flights of fancy that are both wonderful to witness and (at last!) do not detract from the film as a whole.Johnny Depp puts in one of the finest performances in his career as the author of Peter Pan, J.M. Barrie. After his latest play flops in London's West End, Barrie begins a friendship with the four children of Sylvia Llewelyn Davies (Kate Winslet) and finds his inspiration for his next play, a story about a boy who never grows up - "Peter Pan". But the relationship between the Davies' and Barrie puts a tremendous strain on his wife (Radha Mitchell) as well as Sylvia's mother (Julie Christie).It is truly staggering how different Depp is here from his role in "Pirates Of The Caribbean" - here, he is controlled and graceful and his Scottish accent is impeccable. But Depp faces strong competition from the four child actors (Freddie Highmore, Joe Prospero, Nick Roud & Luke Spill) who are also fantastic as the Davies' children. The film also looks superb, with a relentless turn-of-the-century feel for the most part and a surreal dream-like quality during Barrie's flights of fancy when his and the boys' imagination takes over. And while a film based on how a play is written doesn't sound that gripping, it never fails to captivate and hold your attention. My one gripe is that it's a bit too similar to "Shakespeare In Love" but given how extraordinary that film was, that is hardly criticism - indeed, it is mighty praise for a film that surprised and entertained me for every minutes of its duration.I'd happily recommend this film to almost anybody. It's imaginative, emotive and gloriously realised - such a shame that it didn't win more Oscars because this is one of the best films to be released this side of the millennium. It's one of the finest pieces of escapism I've seen and I defy anyone not to feel choked at the end. It's a great date movie as well as fabulous family entertainment, although young children may find their attention wandering. Most of all, it's an intelligent and beautifully produced "writers" movie which, if we're honest, don't come along very often. If you haven't seen it then believe the hype - this is one movie you simply have to see, even if you're not a fan of period dramas (like myself). Depp does it again.

If You Believe, Clap Your Hands...But Wait Until the Final Twenty Poignant Minutes

tt0308644

It's no wonder Michael Jackson is drawn to Peter Pan and the concept of Neverland from this 2004 romanticized telling of playwright James M. Barrie's attachment to the Llewelyn Davies family as the inspiration for his classic play. Director Marc Forster, whose only other credit I know is the melodramatic and overrated "Monster's Ball", draws fine performances from his cast, but the film itself is oddly uninvolving at least until the last twenty minutes. Forster, along with screenwriter David Magee, takes a rather reverential attitude toward their subject, and this beatific sense is heightened by the immaculate approach toward the production.The result seems targeted squarely at the Merchant-Ivory connoisseur of good taste, but somewhere along the way, the edges have been dulled, and the intensity of feeling that Barrie has for the boys has been mollified for a broader audience. Fortunately, Johnny Depp has been ideally cast as Barrie mimicking a convincing Scottish accent in a surprisingly restrained performance. Even so, his unsullied playfulness comes through in his scenes with the children even if they tend to go on ad nauseam. Looking almost too radiant with an innate inability to convey fragility, Kate Winslet has the saintly role of Sylvia Llewelyn Davies, the sickly mother who lives selflessly for her boys while in self-denial about her undisclosed illness.Even more thankless is the role of Barrie's social climbing wife Mary played in an overly pinched manner by Radha Mitchell (take a look at the outtakes to see a much livelier actress at work). Because her character is drawn in such shallow strokes, the unspoken love implied between Barrie and Sylvia seems all the more distracting from the main point of the story, the parallel between life and fantasy in Barrie's writing of "Peter Pan". Unbelievably nearly forty years since her enigmatic Lara in David Lean's "Doctor Zhivago", Julie Christie plays the predictable part of Sylvia's unyielding, Gladys Cooper-type mother with conviction, supposedly the inspiration for Captain Hook. I only wish her character was developed more to match her well-missed talent. In an even smaller role, Dustin Hoffman plays money-conscious impresario Charles Frohman with welcome panache.All four boys are effortless though the standout is Freddie Highmore, who plays the pivotal role of third son Peter. He plaintively lends the gravity of a serious child recovering from his father's death and unwillingly in the throes of a man consumed with fantasy, especially poignant in the closing scene with Depp. The recreation of the original production of "Peter Pan" is done well, even the fanciful scenes toward the end. I also think credit is due to composer Jan A.P. Kaczmarek, who provides an ethereal and evocative musical score.The DVD has the standard set of extras. Forster, Magee and producer Richard Gladstein - though sadly none of the actors - provide informative commentary on an alternate audio track. There are three deleted scenes and about five minutes worth of outtakes which frankly could have blessedly goosed the pacing of the film. Of course, there is the expected making-of featurette, "The Magic of Finding Neverland" but also a quick film on the film's special effects which could have been much longer and a stars-on-the-red-carpet clip that is completely disposable.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-516

ur3608743

title: If You Believe, Clap Your Hands...But Wait Until the Final Twenty Poignant Minutes review: It's no wonder Michael Jackson is drawn to Peter Pan and the concept of Neverland from this 2004 romanticized telling of playwright James M. Barrie's attachment to the Llewelyn Davies family as the inspiration for his classic play. Director Marc Forster, whose only other credit I know is the melodramatic and overrated "Monster's Ball", draws fine performances from his cast, but the film itself is oddly uninvolving at least until the last twenty minutes. Forster, along with screenwriter David Magee, takes a rather reverential attitude toward their subject, and this beatific sense is heightened by the immaculate approach toward the production.The result seems targeted squarely at the Merchant-Ivory connoisseur of good taste, but somewhere along the way, the edges have been dulled, and the intensity of feeling that Barrie has for the boys has been mollified for a broader audience. Fortunately, Johnny Depp has been ideally cast as Barrie mimicking a convincing Scottish accent in a surprisingly restrained performance. Even so, his unsullied playfulness comes through in his scenes with the children even if they tend to go on ad nauseam. Looking almost too radiant with an innate inability to convey fragility, Kate Winslet has the saintly role of Sylvia Llewelyn Davies, the sickly mother who lives selflessly for her boys while in self-denial about her undisclosed illness.Even more thankless is the role of Barrie's social climbing wife Mary played in an overly pinched manner by Radha Mitchell (take a look at the outtakes to see a much livelier actress at work). Because her character is drawn in such shallow strokes, the unspoken love implied between Barrie and Sylvia seems all the more distracting from the main point of the story, the parallel between life and fantasy in Barrie's writing of "Peter Pan". Unbelievably nearly forty years since her enigmatic Lara in David Lean's "Doctor Zhivago", Julie Christie plays the predictable part of Sylvia's unyielding, Gladys Cooper-type mother with conviction, supposedly the inspiration for Captain Hook. I only wish her character was developed more to match her well-missed talent. In an even smaller role, Dustin Hoffman plays money-conscious impresario Charles Frohman with welcome panache.All four boys are effortless though the standout is Freddie Highmore, who plays the pivotal role of third son Peter. He plaintively lends the gravity of a serious child recovering from his father's death and unwillingly in the throes of a man consumed with fantasy, especially poignant in the closing scene with Depp. The recreation of the original production of "Peter Pan" is done well, even the fanciful scenes toward the end. I also think credit is due to composer Jan A.P. Kaczmarek, who provides an ethereal and evocative musical score.The DVD has the standard set of extras. Forster, Magee and producer Richard Gladstein - though sadly none of the actors - provide informative commentary on an alternate audio track. There are three deleted scenes and about five minutes worth of outtakes which frankly could have blessedly goosed the pacing of the film. Of course, there is the expected making-of featurette, "The Magic of Finding Neverland" but also a quick film on the film's special effects which could have been much longer and a stars-on-the-red-carpet clip that is completely disposable.

The delicate situation of a man-child and the legend he creates

tt0308644

Who'd have thunk that the director to take this adaptation of the play "The Man Who Was Peter Pan" to the screen would be the same guy who directed "Monster's Ball"? Then again,who would've thought that the guy who was once Cry-Baby,Edward Scissorhands,Hunter S. Thompson,George Jung or Captain Jack Sparrow would be able to put such a gentle and accurate touch to Pan's creator,James M.Barrie?This offering(a previous commentary was spot-on about this)was a very hyped and Award-ready film,brought to the viewing public by none other than the Weinstein Brothers and Miramax. But still--almost in spite of the publicity overkill--this film is every bit as special and remarkable as its press would have one to believe.Barrie(Johnny Depp)is a frustrated playwright living in London whose chance meeting with an old-monied widow(Kate Winslet) and her four young sons allows for the inspiration he needs,eventually culminating in the creation of the book,then play "Peter Pan". The story is,as most stories of famous occurrences,a richer and deeper tale. The play itself is quite a reach for early twentieth century theatrical production,and selling his already skeptical,bottom-line producer(one-time Captain Hook Dustin Hoffman,understated and brilliant as ever here)is a difficult chore. Barrie's marriage to soft-spoken Mary(Radha Mitchell,also proving to be chameleon-like in her career thus far)is already cold and about to grow colder due to her husband's interest in the widow and her sons. Then,there's the complicated relationship between the widow and her sons(among them,Freddie Highmore as Peter,the most stubborn and sullen of the four),which is unusual for any period. Added in the right amount of tension from the protective mother of the widow Sylvia,played with quiet strength by screen veteran Julie Christie. The director and writers rightly gambled on mixing elements of fantasy into the very real story that is brewing here,because without it,it feels like the explanation of a man-child wanting to manifest his simple dreams into real fantasy might seem stilted or truly strange. Instead,it gives it the right amount of understanding and depth.While there are some similarities to another man-child who's become famous for delving into his own never-ending fantasy of youth and adventure while attaining fame and fortune for his own artist endeavors(I won't name names but here's a hint:his name rhymes with Rykol MAckson),what I've read about Mr.Barrie and what just about anyone who has owned a television has heard or learned about the King of Pop tells me that J.M.Barrie's life was considerably less sordid or disturbing than the man recently acquitted in a California court.This film is a wonderful story within a story. Acting,direction,script and effects are all very memorable. Don't let the genteel,costume-type productions fool you:this film is as accessible as it is fanciful. You might even want to bring a hankie,too.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-458

ur2608802

title: The delicate situation of a man-child and the legend he creates review: Who'd have thunk that the director to take this adaptation of the play "The Man Who Was Peter Pan" to the screen would be the same guy who directed "Monster's Ball"? Then again,who would've thought that the guy who was once Cry-Baby,Edward Scissorhands,Hunter S. Thompson,George Jung or Captain Jack Sparrow would be able to put such a gentle and accurate touch to Pan's creator,James M.Barrie?This offering(a previous commentary was spot-on about this)was a very hyped and Award-ready film,brought to the viewing public by none other than the Weinstein Brothers and Miramax. But still--almost in spite of the publicity overkill--this film is every bit as special and remarkable as its press would have one to believe.Barrie(Johnny Depp)is a frustrated playwright living in London whose chance meeting with an old-monied widow(Kate Winslet) and her four young sons allows for the inspiration he needs,eventually culminating in the creation of the book,then play "Peter Pan". The story is,as most stories of famous occurrences,a richer and deeper tale. The play itself is quite a reach for early twentieth century theatrical production,and selling his already skeptical,bottom-line producer(one-time Captain Hook Dustin Hoffman,understated and brilliant as ever here)is a difficult chore. Barrie's marriage to soft-spoken Mary(Radha Mitchell,also proving to be chameleon-like in her career thus far)is already cold and about to grow colder due to her husband's interest in the widow and her sons. Then,there's the complicated relationship between the widow and her sons(among them,Freddie Highmore as Peter,the most stubborn and sullen of the four),which is unusual for any period. Added in the right amount of tension from the protective mother of the widow Sylvia,played with quiet strength by screen veteran Julie Christie. The director and writers rightly gambled on mixing elements of fantasy into the very real story that is brewing here,because without it,it feels like the explanation of a man-child wanting to manifest his simple dreams into real fantasy might seem stilted or truly strange. Instead,it gives it the right amount of understanding and depth.While there are some similarities to another man-child who's become famous for delving into his own never-ending fantasy of youth and adventure while attaining fame and fortune for his own artist endeavors(I won't name names but here's a hint:his name rhymes with Rykol MAckson),what I've read about Mr.Barrie and what just about anyone who has owned a television has heard or learned about the King of Pop tells me that J.M.Barrie's life was considerably less sordid or disturbing than the man recently acquitted in a California court.This film is a wonderful story within a story. Acting,direction,script and effects are all very memorable. Don't let the genteel,costume-type productions fool you:this film is as accessible as it is fanciful. You might even want to bring a hankie,too.

Believe

tt0308644

In 1903, in England, the play writer James Matthew Barrie has a complete lack of inspiration, and his last work was a deceptive play. When he meets the children of the widow Sylvia Llewelyn Davies, he becomes friend of the family and Sylvia becomes his muse and her children the source of inspiration. James writes the successful play about "Peter Pan and Neverland".I liked the movie for it's imagination and originality. Yeah, the costume design is good and all that mojo bojo but I really don't know what else to say about this film. Johnny Depp's performance was good. Kate Winslet and Freddie Highmore's performances was also good.The CGI in the film was great, along with its cinematography. I found it really moving and emotional with Marc Forster's direction to help it. This magical film is another line of movies that has great performances and script.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-587

ur8334868

title: Believe review: In 1903, in England, the play writer James Matthew Barrie has a complete lack of inspiration, and his last work was a deceptive play. When he meets the children of the widow Sylvia Llewelyn Davies, he becomes friend of the family and Sylvia becomes his muse and her children the source of inspiration. James writes the successful play about "Peter Pan and Neverland".I liked the movie for it's imagination and originality. Yeah, the costume design is good and all that mojo bojo but I really don't know what else to say about this film. Johnny Depp's performance was good. Kate Winslet and Freddie Highmore's performances was also good.The CGI in the film was great, along with its cinematography. I found it really moving and emotional with Marc Forster's direction to help it. This magical film is another line of movies that has great performances and script.

Better Than Expected!

tt0308644

Finding Neverland is a really great, powerful family film that discusses the life of J.M Barrie and his inspiration for Peter Pan. I never thought much of this film in the past despite positive reviews and Academy recognition. But I should have because it's sweet, heart-warming, emotional, and a perfect example of a family film. I would have never thought that the director of this film, Marc Forster would go on to direct a James Bond film.Forster's film is about a failing playwright named J.M Barrie. He meets this family of a woman and her three kids as he is sitting in the park. He becomes great friends with this family and little did he know how this changed his life for the better and created a story so magical, that many children around the world cherish the beloved Peter Pan.Johnny Depp is really good in the film. This is a departure from his other roles of Jack Sparrow or Edward Scissorhands. He shows why he's better than people give him credit for. The guy knows how to act. Kate Winslet is really good as the mother and Julie Christie is great as the stern mother of Winslet. However, Freddie Highmore deserves the highest credit in his role of Peter.Overall, this is a very heartwarming story of a man who invented one of the most famous childhood figures of all time. I shouldn't have doubted this film but this is a true example of a biography. It's one of those rare ones that are safe for kids. I really loved this film and it will remain in my heart for years to come. I rate this film 10/10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-664

ur17646017

title: Better Than Expected! review: Finding Neverland is a really great, powerful family film that discusses the life of J.M Barrie and his inspiration for Peter Pan. I never thought much of this film in the past despite positive reviews and Academy recognition. But I should have because it's sweet, heart-warming, emotional, and a perfect example of a family film. I would have never thought that the director of this film, Marc Forster would go on to direct a James Bond film.Forster's film is about a failing playwright named J.M Barrie. He meets this family of a woman and her three kids as he is sitting in the park. He becomes great friends with this family and little did he know how this changed his life for the better and created a story so magical, that many children around the world cherish the beloved Peter Pan.Johnny Depp is really good in the film. This is a departure from his other roles of Jack Sparrow or Edward Scissorhands. He shows why he's better than people give him credit for. The guy knows how to act. Kate Winslet is really good as the mother and Julie Christie is great as the stern mother of Winslet. However, Freddie Highmore deserves the highest credit in his role of Peter.Overall, this is a very heartwarming story of a man who invented one of the most famous childhood figures of all time. I shouldn't have doubted this film but this is a true example of a biography. It's one of those rare ones that are safe for kids. I really loved this film and it will remain in my heart for years to come. I rate this film 10/10.

An enjoyable yet flawed biopic, with a fantastic lead performance worthy of a higher quality motion picture

tt0308644

Although "Finding Neverland" is a fine biopic of Peter Pan creator J.M. Barrie (played by Johnny Depp), it is also fairly standard in regards to the method it uses to approach the formulaic biopic; I got the feeling I had seen something like this before. The emotional moments all rang true but they still seemed eerily similar to other films of the genre.However the lead performance by Johnny Depp is truly marvelous and he deserved an Oscar more than Clint Eastwood, at least in my humble opinion. It's hard enough to act as well as he does in this film; perfecting the accent is even harder. And he does both equally, exceedingly well.The cast all do their best. It's nice to see Julie Christie back on the screen again and Kate Winslet, although fitting, didn't make a huge impression as I'd seen her play similar roles in the past. The most visible casting oddity has to be Dustin Hoffman; I couldn't tell if he was playing an Englishman or an American. His accent was uneven and role seemed strangely out-of-place, as if they cast him only for the sake of irony. (Some might recall he played Captain Hook in Steven Spielberg's "Hook.")I enjoyed the movie but it was not the most original film to come out of Hollywood in recent years. Like many biopictures it follows the same sort of formula - I hate to call it "sappy" because that sounds demeaning, but it's somewhat true.For example, although it's a true story, the film still manages to exaggerate all the right moments in order to tug on the audience's heartstrings; the effect is somewhat manipulative and definitely "glossed over." Overall "Finding Neverland" is different from the Peter Pan stories we are familiar with, and remains fairly truthful to J.M. Barrie's life. Johnny Depp is superb and the film is amusing and worth seeing. It is not, however, what I would call a "masterpiece," nor is it one of a kind. But it's still good and better than a lot of the stuff that came out last year.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-417

ur1173088

title: An enjoyable yet flawed biopic, with a fantastic lead performance worthy of a higher quality motion picture review: Although "Finding Neverland" is a fine biopic of Peter Pan creator J.M. Barrie (played by Johnny Depp), it is also fairly standard in regards to the method it uses to approach the formulaic biopic; I got the feeling I had seen something like this before. The emotional moments all rang true but they still seemed eerily similar to other films of the genre.However the lead performance by Johnny Depp is truly marvelous and he deserved an Oscar more than Clint Eastwood, at least in my humble opinion. It's hard enough to act as well as he does in this film; perfecting the accent is even harder. And he does both equally, exceedingly well.The cast all do their best. It's nice to see Julie Christie back on the screen again and Kate Winslet, although fitting, didn't make a huge impression as I'd seen her play similar roles in the past. The most visible casting oddity has to be Dustin Hoffman; I couldn't tell if he was playing an Englishman or an American. His accent was uneven and role seemed strangely out-of-place, as if they cast him only for the sake of irony. (Some might recall he played Captain Hook in Steven Spielberg's "Hook.")I enjoyed the movie but it was not the most original film to come out of Hollywood in recent years. Like many biopictures it follows the same sort of formula - I hate to call it "sappy" because that sounds demeaning, but it's somewhat true.For example, although it's a true story, the film still manages to exaggerate all the right moments in order to tug on the audience's heartstrings; the effect is somewhat manipulative and definitely "glossed over." Overall "Finding Neverland" is different from the Peter Pan stories we are familiar with, and remains fairly truthful to J.M. Barrie's life. Johnny Depp is superb and the film is amusing and worth seeing. It is not, however, what I would call a "masterpiece," nor is it one of a kind. But it's still good and better than a lot of the stuff that came out last year.

Land of "Hope and Glory"

tt0308644

OK, this film is about the guy who wrote "Peter Pan", and what led him to write it (just for one review, I don't want to be accused of including spoilers). Much of what has already been written, particularly the comment by the divorce attorney and the 'Trivia' section, is worth reading. So what can I say that hasn't already been said? How about: boys in Britain really did dress like that once; Johnny Depp's Scottish accent is nearly realistic but not quite right; and despite being about Neverland, it's one of the most realistic portrayals of humanity to come out of Hollywood for some time. If you liked it, particularly the boys, you might also like "Hope and Glory" from 1987 -- less of a tear jerker, but another good angle on British childhood in difficult circumstances.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-256

ur0134919

title: Land of "Hope and Glory" review: OK, this film is about the guy who wrote "Peter Pan", and what led him to write it (just for one review, I don't want to be accused of including spoilers). Much of what has already been written, particularly the comment by the divorce attorney and the 'Trivia' section, is worth reading. So what can I say that hasn't already been said? How about: boys in Britain really did dress like that once; Johnny Depp's Scottish accent is nearly realistic but not quite right; and despite being about Neverland, it's one of the most realistic portrayals of humanity to come out of Hollywood for some time. If you liked it, particularly the boys, you might also like "Hope and Glory" from 1987 -- less of a tear jerker, but another good angle on British childhood in difficult circumstances.

Land of "Hope and Glory"

tt0308644

OK, this film is about the guy who wrote "Peter Pan", and what led him to write it (just for one review, I don't want to be accused of including spoilers). Much of what has already been written, particularly the comment by the divorce attorney and the 'Trivia' section, is worth reading. So what can I say that hasn't already been said? How about: boys in Britain really did dress like that once; Johnny Depp's Scottish accent is nearly realistic but not quite right; and despite being about Neverland, it's one of the most realistic portrayals of humanity to come out of Hollywood for some time. If you liked it, particularly the boys, you might also like "Hope and Glory" from 1987 -- less of a tear jerker, but another good angle on British childhood in difficult circumstances.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-255

ur0134919

title: Land of "Hope and Glory" review: OK, this film is about the guy who wrote "Peter Pan", and what led him to write it (just for one review, I don't want to be accused of including spoilers). Much of what has already been written, particularly the comment by the divorce attorney and the 'Trivia' section, is worth reading. So what can I say that hasn't already been said? How about: boys in Britain really did dress like that once; Johnny Depp's Scottish accent is nearly realistic but not quite right; and despite being about Neverland, it's one of the most realistic portrayals of humanity to come out of Hollywood for some time. If you liked it, particularly the boys, you might also like "Hope and Glory" from 1987 -- less of a tear jerker, but another good angle on British childhood in difficult circumstances.

Beautiful film

tt0308644

I usually hate films aimed to children, because I don't like children very much, but I loved this film. I found it moving, inspiring and heartbreaking. I found this film to be very good, mostly because of the performance of Johnny Depp, which is not only were handsome, but also a great actor. I loved him in this film, his character was simply adorable, and his performance was much better than the one of Kate Winslet, who gives here a weak and boring performance, just like always. But besides that, this was a great film, filled with moving and inspiring scenes, and lots of heartwarming scenes. The ending was so sad that I almost cry. It was just so heartbreaking. However, it is a wonderful film, for all the family.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-640

ur23853088

title: Beautiful film review: I usually hate films aimed to children, because I don't like children very much, but I loved this film. I found it moving, inspiring and heartbreaking. I found this film to be very good, mostly because of the performance of Johnny Depp, which is not only were handsome, but also a great actor. I loved him in this film, his character was simply adorable, and his performance was much better than the one of Kate Winslet, who gives here a weak and boring performance, just like always. But besides that, this was a great film, filled with moving and inspiring scenes, and lots of heartwarming scenes. The ending was so sad that I almost cry. It was just so heartbreaking. However, it is a wonderful film, for all the family.

A masterpiece

tt0308644

Marc Forster has directed a gem here.No doubt the movie is a bit slow but what overcomes it is the great acting & evergreen soundtrack.Johnny Depp & Kate Winslet have given a riveting performance.A performance that will surely get to you.Dustin Hoffman also performs a great role in the movie.The kids in the film are pretty good.They have done a tremendous job here.The plot is a play-writer finds shade in a family as he begins dreaming about his novel & writes a beautiful play called The Peter Pan.The children & their mother Kate are his inspiration.But something tragic happens in the end.But Depp makes Kate feel what she meant to him.The soundtrack is fabulous.So Finding Neverland is a pretty good film to watch.A family movie.A masterpiece!!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-629

ur18407045

title: A masterpiece review: Marc Forster has directed a gem here.No doubt the movie is a bit slow but what overcomes it is the great acting & evergreen soundtrack.Johnny Depp & Kate Winslet have given a riveting performance.A performance that will surely get to you.Dustin Hoffman also performs a great role in the movie.The kids in the film are pretty good.They have done a tremendous job here.The plot is a play-writer finds shade in a family as he begins dreaming about his novel & writes a beautiful play called The Peter Pan.The children & their mother Kate are his inspiration.But something tragic happens in the end.But Depp makes Kate feel what she meant to him.The soundtrack is fabulous.So Finding Neverland is a pretty good film to watch.A family movie.A masterpiece!!

Pleasantly surprised

tt0308644

I just came back from seeing this movie in high spirits. It was one of those rare movies which manages to be both funny and touching at the same time ("Man on the Moon" comes to mind as another example). The movie is quite straightforward and does not break new ground in any way. But the story is good and uplifting (I wonder how much is actually true), the direction is good if not brilliant, and the acting is overall outstanding. I have had some reservations about Johnny Depp before, but here he is perfect. And the little boy who plays Peter; what can I say, the final scene just blew me away. I laughed out loud and was moved to tears several times during this film. Recommended!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-264

ur0972226

title: Pleasantly surprised review: I just came back from seeing this movie in high spirits. It was one of those rare movies which manages to be both funny and touching at the same time ("Man on the Moon" comes to mind as another example). The movie is quite straightforward and does not break new ground in any way. But the story is good and uplifting (I wonder how much is actually true), the direction is good if not brilliant, and the acting is overall outstanding. I have had some reservations about Johnny Depp before, but here he is perfect. And the little boy who plays Peter; what can I say, the final scene just blew me away. I laughed out loud and was moved to tears several times during this film. Recommended!

Touching the soul of inspiration

tt0308644

How do you capture that suspension of disbelief that not only makes a great movie or a great play, but is at the heart of every playful notion that has captivated a child at play, every romantic phrase that has enchanted a woman towards her dreams, every word of love that a woman has blanked everything from the mind of the man she adores, every uplifting speech of every great leader that has given hope and fortitude to the populace . . . where is the seat of that creative vision, that sees beyond the world as it is, reaches out towards the world as it could be, and communicates the joy of that vision?Finding Neverland traces key events of a great writer, JM Barrie, whose childless and less than perfectly happy life not only found joy and fulfilment in creating such a dream, but whose story, Peter Pan, while on the surface a children's story, also examined the very ways that we exercise creativity or 'make-believe'.Johnny Depp produces another of his perfectly-believable-and-utterly-memorable characters in the form of the troubled author and playwright. Kate Winslet, as the Sylvia whose children provide the inspiration for Peter Pan, does not yet seem to have the acting range to provide exquisitely formed new personas with every film, but her charisma nevertheless screams out from every scene (and, in accordance with every non-skeletal woman's fantasy, she looks totally ravishing). Julie Christie (who plays her mother) and Dustin Hoffman (who plays the producer of Barrie's play) are barely recognisable, giving great dignity to their supporting roles by not hogging the limelight. Kelly Macdonald, the token Scots person, provides a wonderful stage Peter Pan, covering her Scots accent almost as well as Depp contrives his (JM Barrie was from Kirriemuir in Forfar, Scotland). Perhaps the most ironic thing about Finding Neverland is that it is a film not for children (or even teenagers) but for adults. The deep (and largely unspoken) emotion between Depp and Winslet, the process of reaching out and communicating through poetic language, the way children *do* grow up (and the way adults remain children), and where fantasy and reality begin and end - these are themes more easily recognised by those who have (or maybe always wanted to have) brought up children, rather than those children themselves. Unrequited love, the things that move an audience (and when, why and how it will move them to bring critical acclaim and their cheque books), the importance of artistic and personal legacies -all these topics are treated in a responsible way that Barrie, if he indeed fully understood the importance of what he wrote, would have been proud.Finding Neverland cradles a lasting inspiration - perhaps one that will last into eternity.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-52

ur0064493

title: Touching the soul of inspiration review: How do you capture that suspension of disbelief that not only makes a great movie or a great play, but is at the heart of every playful notion that has captivated a child at play, every romantic phrase that has enchanted a woman towards her dreams, every word of love that a woman has blanked everything from the mind of the man she adores, every uplifting speech of every great leader that has given hope and fortitude to the populace . . . where is the seat of that creative vision, that sees beyond the world as it is, reaches out towards the world as it could be, and communicates the joy of that vision?Finding Neverland traces key events of a great writer, JM Barrie, whose childless and less than perfectly happy life not only found joy and fulfilment in creating such a dream, but whose story, Peter Pan, while on the surface a children's story, also examined the very ways that we exercise creativity or 'make-believe'.Johnny Depp produces another of his perfectly-believable-and-utterly-memorable characters in the form of the troubled author and playwright. Kate Winslet, as the Sylvia whose children provide the inspiration for Peter Pan, does not yet seem to have the acting range to provide exquisitely formed new personas with every film, but her charisma nevertheless screams out from every scene (and, in accordance with every non-skeletal woman's fantasy, she looks totally ravishing). Julie Christie (who plays her mother) and Dustin Hoffman (who plays the producer of Barrie's play) are barely recognisable, giving great dignity to their supporting roles by not hogging the limelight. Kelly Macdonald, the token Scots person, provides a wonderful stage Peter Pan, covering her Scots accent almost as well as Depp contrives his (JM Barrie was from Kirriemuir in Forfar, Scotland). Perhaps the most ironic thing about Finding Neverland is that it is a film not for children (or even teenagers) but for adults. The deep (and largely unspoken) emotion between Depp and Winslet, the process of reaching out and communicating through poetic language, the way children *do* grow up (and the way adults remain children), and where fantasy and reality begin and end - these are themes more easily recognised by those who have (or maybe always wanted to have) brought up children, rather than those children themselves. Unrequited love, the things that move an audience (and when, why and how it will move them to bring critical acclaim and their cheque books), the importance of artistic and personal legacies -all these topics are treated in a responsible way that Barrie, if he indeed fully understood the importance of what he wrote, would have been proud.Finding Neverland cradles a lasting inspiration - perhaps one that will last into eternity.

Superb Acting and Brilliantly Made

tt0308644

Finding Neverland is one of the best films I have seen all year. Depp and Winslet are superb and their supporting cast is very strong in particular Julie Christie, Dustin Hoffman and Freddie Highmore. Forster's direction is tight and he maintains a story which had the potential to drag. Depp delivers a performance that is truly believable and he interacts with his co-stars well, in particular, Freddie Highmore who delivers a performance that outshines Depp's. It is a tour de force of acting talent. Clearly Highmore has a great career ahead of him. 9/10 for a superb piece of film-making, made diligently but, unfortunately, up against such strong contention, it had to make do with a disappointing award haul.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-134

ur4309318

title: Superb Acting and Brilliantly Made review: Finding Neverland is one of the best films I have seen all year. Depp and Winslet are superb and their supporting cast is very strong in particular Julie Christie, Dustin Hoffman and Freddie Highmore. Forster's direction is tight and he maintains a story which had the potential to drag. Depp delivers a performance that is truly believable and he interacts with his co-stars well, in particular, Freddie Highmore who delivers a performance that outshines Depp's. It is a tour de force of acting talent. Clearly Highmore has a great career ahead of him. 9/10 for a superb piece of film-making, made diligently but, unfortunately, up against such strong contention, it had to make do with a disappointing award haul.

Excellent in every way.

tt0308644

Although this review contains no real spoilers, I will mark this as having some to be on the safe side. But I bet you know the tale already, it is after all about "Peter Pan." This is a movie of loss and gain; of boys that grow up too fast, and boys that never grow old; of wonder and cynicism; happy and sad. It's all that at the same time. It's excellent, and probably Depp's best role to date.I felt sorry for what happened to the characters, I worried, and I was happy when the children "found themselves again." I'm not sure how truly accurate the film is, but that doesn't matter: it is a film, and some suspension of belief is needed; and they never said this was a biopic.It isn't often that a film like this comes about. They're rare, like trips to Neverland by an adult, something to be cherished.Having said all that, this is still not a "perfect" movie, the flaw is that I don't believe this will withstand multiple viewings, but I could be wrong. Pathos aside, this is a good film, excellent even; but not worthy of too high a rating. It would be a disservice to rate this too highly, and equally so too low; so I have to give it a nice, round, "6" out of "10." Still, you should see this. It's worth the price of admission.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-193

ur0263226

title: Excellent in every way. review: Although this review contains no real spoilers, I will mark this as having some to be on the safe side. But I bet you know the tale already, it is after all about "Peter Pan." This is a movie of loss and gain; of boys that grow up too fast, and boys that never grow old; of wonder and cynicism; happy and sad. It's all that at the same time. It's excellent, and probably Depp's best role to date.I felt sorry for what happened to the characters, I worried, and I was happy when the children "found themselves again." I'm not sure how truly accurate the film is, but that doesn't matter: it is a film, and some suspension of belief is needed; and they never said this was a biopic.It isn't often that a film like this comes about. They're rare, like trips to Neverland by an adult, something to be cherished.Having said all that, this is still not a "perfect" movie, the flaw is that I don't believe this will withstand multiple viewings, but I could be wrong. Pathos aside, this is a good film, excellent even; but not worthy of too high a rating. It would be a disservice to rate this too highly, and equally so too low; so I have to give it a nice, round, "6" out of "10." Still, you should see this. It's worth the price of admission.

Just a dog? *Just*? What a horrible candle-snuffing word.

tt0308644

I am in a Johnny Depp mood at the moment. Three in a row according to my current schedule.How could I have missed this film that was nominated for over 70 awards, winning 17, including an Oscar? Well, I fixed that today.Was there supposed to be something salacious going on between Sir James Matthew Barrie (Johnny Depp) and the four boys? If so, it was not evident.Despite the fact that their grandmother (Julie Christie) had her nose up in the air over his playing with the children, it was apparently just his way of having fun and looking for an idea for a play.Kate Winslet was fantastic as the children's mother, who was trying to hide her sickness from the boys due to the fact that already had to deal with the death of their father.Of course, his wife (Radha Mitchell) did not like the idea that he was spending so much time with the children and their mother.Of course the art direction and the sets were stupendous, and Depp was as brilliant as I have ever seen him.The addition of the orphans to the audience was, as Dustin Hoffman said, genius.This movie was just pure magic.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-619

ur2171244

title: Just a dog? *Just*? What a horrible candle-snuffing word. review: I am in a Johnny Depp mood at the moment. Three in a row according to my current schedule.How could I have missed this film that was nominated for over 70 awards, winning 17, including an Oscar? Well, I fixed that today.Was there supposed to be something salacious going on between Sir James Matthew Barrie (Johnny Depp) and the four boys? If so, it was not evident.Despite the fact that their grandmother (Julie Christie) had her nose up in the air over his playing with the children, it was apparently just his way of having fun and looking for an idea for a play.Kate Winslet was fantastic as the children's mother, who was trying to hide her sickness from the boys due to the fact that already had to deal with the death of their father.Of course, his wife (Radha Mitchell) did not like the idea that he was spending so much time with the children and their mother.Of course the art direction and the sets were stupendous, and Depp was as brilliant as I have ever seen him.The addition of the orphans to the audience was, as Dustin Hoffman said, genius.This movie was just pure magic.

A very charming story and a fine insight into the creation of one of the most charming stories!!!

tt0308644

STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All Costs Set in 1903 England,this charts the tale of writer JM Barrie (Johnny Depp) who is suffering a set-back in the shape of some plays opening to some particularly lousy reviews.Then he forms a relationship with the recently widowed Sylvia Llewelyn Davies (Kate Winslet) and her boys.This film charts how Barrie's relationship with the woman and her boys came to cause some consternation and concern among the people of that era,the deterioration of his own marriage and how their relationship blossomed to such a degree it inspired him to write arguably the most endearing children's tale of our time,Peter Pan.This can best be described as another fine Oscar contender.It is by turns endearing and amusing,with fine performances all round.Depp puts in another fine turn and displays some fine versatility as an actor,not to mention delivering a fine Edinburgh accent.The supporting cast,in the shape of Winslet,Dustin Hoffman,the boys and the rest,roll proceedings along splendidly too.The film truly feels alive with the sense of wonder and imagination that inhabited Barrie's heart and mind.The script also delivers on this front,capturing the heart-and-soul of the film as well as the actual story-telling.If the film has any faults,it's that it's too short.All these positive qualities I've mentioned aren't given perhaps as much room to breathe as to really make them take off and fly.But on the whole,it's a thoroughly worthwhile adventure that deserved to win whatever Oscars it did.****

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0308644/reviews-423

ur0345596

title: A very charming story and a fine insight into the creation of one of the most charming stories!!! review: STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All Costs Set in 1903 England,this charts the tale of writer JM Barrie (Johnny Depp) who is suffering a set-back in the shape of some plays opening to some particularly lousy reviews.Then he forms a relationship with the recently widowed Sylvia Llewelyn Davies (Kate Winslet) and her boys.This film charts how Barrie's relationship with the woman and her boys came to cause some consternation and concern among the people of that era,the deterioration of his own marriage and how their relationship blossomed to such a degree it inspired him to write arguably the most endearing children's tale of our time,Peter Pan.This can best be described as another fine Oscar contender.It is by turns endearing and amusing,with fine performances all round.Depp puts in another fine turn and displays some fine versatility as an actor,not to mention delivering a fine Edinburgh accent.The supporting cast,in the shape of Winslet,Dustin Hoffman,the boys and the rest,roll proceedings along splendidly too.The film truly feels alive with the sense of wonder and imagination that inhabited Barrie's heart and mind.The script also delivers on this front,capturing the heart-and-soul of the film as well as the actual story-telling.If the film has any faults,it's that it's too short.All these positive qualities I've mentioned aren't given perhaps as much room to breathe as to really make them take off and fly.But on the whole,it's a thoroughly worthwhile adventure that deserved to win whatever Oscars it did.****

A bedraggled action drama...but Gibson retains his big-screen charisma

tt1567609

¡Es ridículo! American bank robber is nabbed at the border by nefarious Mexican cops who pilfer his loot and send him down the river to El Pueblito, a prison run by gangsters which looks more like a poor man's open-air market. Co-writer/co-producer/star Mel Gibson failed to reignite his box-office touch with this trigger-happy turkey, one with a budget of some $20 million but not even the recipient of a theatrical release in the States (the film premiered here on pay-per-view instead). Although hampered by both a sloppy prologue and a limp finish, there are several strong scenes in between--plus an unusual, interesting locale. Gibson still knows how to command attention, however some of the more explosive action (including a rock-and-roll shootout) appears tatty. *1/2 from ****

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-99

ur0989035

title: A bedraggled action drama...but Gibson retains his big-screen charisma review: ¡Es ridículo! American bank robber is nabbed at the border by nefarious Mexican cops who pilfer his loot and send him down the river to El Pueblito, a prison run by gangsters which looks more like a poor man's open-air market. Co-writer/co-producer/star Mel Gibson failed to reignite his box-office touch with this trigger-happy turkey, one with a budget of some $20 million but not even the recipient of a theatrical release in the States (the film premiered here on pay-per-view instead). Although hampered by both a sloppy prologue and a limp finish, there are several strong scenes in between--plus an unusual, interesting locale. Gibson still knows how to command attention, however some of the more explosive action (including a rock-and-roll shootout) appears tatty. *1/2 from ****

Nice to see you again, Mel.

tt1567609

Mel Gibson's back in a gritty prison/action movie that has him arrested after embezzling from the mob and thrown in a bazaar-like shantytown prison in Mexico. As he puts it in voice-over: "Is this a prison or the World's Sh-ttiest Mall?". Inside, he befriends a nine year-old boy who helps him learn the ins and outs of prison life, while the mobsters outside are looking for their missing money. It's a Mel Gibson vehicle, all the way. Written and financed by Gibson himself, the action slows to a crawl when he's not in the scene. And first-time director Adrian Grunberg gives the movie its pulpy flair, with shootouts that in the Robert Rodriguez mold. There's a novel sense of dark humor in the Mel's imprisonment in the filthiest mall known to man, while inventive editing makes the torture scenes seem all the more visceral. And then Peter Stormare shows up as the head of the mob (in a role that's jut comical enough to keep things happy). It's nice to see Mel back in such an action-oriented role, complete with smoker's-voice deadpan narration. And while it's not "Lethal Weapon" Mel, it follows in the footsteps of "Payback" which is just as good (as I tend to be a "Payback" fan). 7/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-72

ur1994077

title: Nice to see you again, Mel. review: Mel Gibson's back in a gritty prison/action movie that has him arrested after embezzling from the mob and thrown in a bazaar-like shantytown prison in Mexico. As he puts it in voice-over: "Is this a prison or the World's Sh-ttiest Mall?". Inside, he befriends a nine year-old boy who helps him learn the ins and outs of prison life, while the mobsters outside are looking for their missing money. It's a Mel Gibson vehicle, all the way. Written and financed by Gibson himself, the action slows to a crawl when he's not in the scene. And first-time director Adrian Grunberg gives the movie its pulpy flair, with shootouts that in the Robert Rodriguez mold. There's a novel sense of dark humor in the Mel's imprisonment in the filthiest mall known to man, while inventive editing makes the torture scenes seem all the more visceral. And then Peter Stormare shows up as the head of the mob (in a role that's jut comical enough to keep things happy). It's nice to see Mel back in such an action-oriented role, complete with smoker's-voice deadpan narration. And while it's not "Lethal Weapon" Mel, it follows in the footsteps of "Payback" which is just as good (as I tend to be a "Payback" fan). 7/10

Decent action film

tt1567609

A car is being chased by the police at a Texas border and two men in clown masks are in the lead. Mel Gibson is in the front and the guy in the back seat is bleeding from his mouth. He drives over the wall into Mexico, and thats when his troubles really begin. The Americans offer to take him, but when a large amount of cash is found, our law enforcement neighbors to the south scoop up the cash and take Mel to jail. He is the lone gringo and learns to adapt quickly in order to survive.The corruption is incredible; the inmates have guns, drugs, and women available; all for a price. He meets a ten year old kid whose mother is in the prison on a drug charge. The boy is a liver match for a big shot who runs the place. The higher ups find out about 2 million dollars taken by the cops and they attempt to get it back. Mel makes a deal to kill the man who he originally stole the money from because he is powerful enough to get revenge on whoever took his cash. Mel is given a car, money, guns, and a phony i.d. to cross back into the U.S. to eliminate the original owner of the big bucks and he manages to con his way to him. Next he heads back to Mexico to the prison to try to save the boy from organ removal. The conclusion is o.k. but nothing new. Get the Gringo is a decent action film.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-25

ur14295241

title: Decent action film review: A car is being chased by the police at a Texas border and two men in clown masks are in the lead. Mel Gibson is in the front and the guy in the back seat is bleeding from his mouth. He drives over the wall into Mexico, and thats when his troubles really begin. The Americans offer to take him, but when a large amount of cash is found, our law enforcement neighbors to the south scoop up the cash and take Mel to jail. He is the lone gringo and learns to adapt quickly in order to survive.The corruption is incredible; the inmates have guns, drugs, and women available; all for a price. He meets a ten year old kid whose mother is in the prison on a drug charge. The boy is a liver match for a big shot who runs the place. The higher ups find out about 2 million dollars taken by the cops and they attempt to get it back. Mel makes a deal to kill the man who he originally stole the money from because he is powerful enough to get revenge on whoever took his cash. Mel is given a car, money, guns, and a phony i.d. to cross back into the U.S. to eliminate the original owner of the big bucks and he manages to con his way to him. Next he heads back to Mexico to the prison to try to save the boy from organ removal. The conclusion is o.k. but nothing new. Get the Gringo is a decent action film.

Not highly memorable, but an entertaining film

tt1567609

Due to his erratic behavior and inappropriate comments, Mel Gibson's days as a Hollywood star have finished (even though, on the other hand, he's more popular than ever as an object of jokes and parodies). The films from his filmography, which once were big box office successes, are currently ignored by most of the people. However, his recent work in Edge of Darkness, The Beaver and Get the Gringo proves that Gibson keeps being a solid actor. As for Get the Gringo as a film, I found it entertaining, but not very memorable.I usually think it's a mistake to take the cinema as a didactic tool, but even like that, I think Get the Gringo opened my eyes regarding the Mexican penitentiary system. I suppose that not every jail is like the fictitious Pueblito, but I suspect that the level of corruption is pretty close to reality, and because of that, I found this film more interesting for its social setting and environment than for the main character's adventures. Having said that, I liked the labyrinth of hierarchies, motivations and secrets revealed through the movie, as well as the picturesque characters which are perfectly played by the whole cast, highlighting Kevin Hernández. As for Gibson, he's credible in his role, and he also makes his character likable.On the negative side, I found Get the Gringo better in concept than in execution. Some of the twists made by the screenplay display moderate ingenuity and narrative creativity; unfortunately, we also find too many coincidences and improbable elements which contradict the "border logic" from the film (for example, I could never swallow the reasons why the "owners" of the jail decided to keep the main character alive; it seems that their only motivation is: "If we kill him, the movie is over"). Besides, some moments of humor (such as Clint Eastwood's imitation) feel out of place in such a raw film, which isn't afraid of hurting sensibilities with its representation of Mexican justice. Nevertheless, despite those complaints, I had a good time while watching Get the Gringo, mainly because of Adrian Grunberg's efficient direction and the good performances, and I think that makes it worthy of a moderate recommendation.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-81

ur6216723

title: Not highly memorable, but an entertaining film review: Due to his erratic behavior and inappropriate comments, Mel Gibson's days as a Hollywood star have finished (even though, on the other hand, he's more popular than ever as an object of jokes and parodies). The films from his filmography, which once were big box office successes, are currently ignored by most of the people. However, his recent work in Edge of Darkness, The Beaver and Get the Gringo proves that Gibson keeps being a solid actor. As for Get the Gringo as a film, I found it entertaining, but not very memorable.I usually think it's a mistake to take the cinema as a didactic tool, but even like that, I think Get the Gringo opened my eyes regarding the Mexican penitentiary system. I suppose that not every jail is like the fictitious Pueblito, but I suspect that the level of corruption is pretty close to reality, and because of that, I found this film more interesting for its social setting and environment than for the main character's adventures. Having said that, I liked the labyrinth of hierarchies, motivations and secrets revealed through the movie, as well as the picturesque characters which are perfectly played by the whole cast, highlighting Kevin Hernández. As for Gibson, he's credible in his role, and he also makes his character likable.On the negative side, I found Get the Gringo better in concept than in execution. Some of the twists made by the screenplay display moderate ingenuity and narrative creativity; unfortunately, we also find too many coincidences and improbable elements which contradict the "border logic" from the film (for example, I could never swallow the reasons why the "owners" of the jail decided to keep the main character alive; it seems that their only motivation is: "If we kill him, the movie is over"). Besides, some moments of humor (such as Clint Eastwood's imitation) feel out of place in such a raw film, which isn't afraid of hurting sensibilities with its representation of Mexican justice. Nevertheless, despite those complaints, I had a good time while watching Get the Gringo, mainly because of Adrian Grunberg's efficient direction and the good performances, and I think that makes it worthy of a moderate recommendation.

Mel Gibson kicks some ass!

tt1567609

Get the Gringo. Strange title. Hasn't been released in Australia or America, I'm glad I got the chance to watch this movie. Right from the start, the movie kicks off with a good, ol' car chase. The chase scene is quite fun to watch and it results in the capture of Gibson's unnamed character who is then thrown into a prison. Mind you, it is not a typical lights out at 10 sorta prison film but rather the prison has its own rules and to be honest, there aren't that much rules. For starters, the prison houses both males and females, adults and children, and the inmates can carry guns. Gibson is thrown into the prison and makes friends with a young boy with a knack for smoking. The two then work together to survive the harsh conditions inside the facility.Mel Gibson is back to kicking ass and being cool. No doubt he is the highlight of the show and it is great to watch him being in one of his better roles in recent years. I think it is safe to say that he is better here than he was at 'The Beaver'. But anyway, Mel acts very cool and charismatic and his character is very likable. While the film may not star major or well-known actors, they aren't too bad. The kid he teams up with isn't too bad in this film and he is quite an alright kid. Kevin Hernandez has potential to be a great actor. It also stars Dean Norris, from Breaking Bad, who has a small but appreciated cameo in the film. This is Adrian Grunberg's directorial debut and he pulls of a fun, sort-of smart, and stylish action film.The action in the film is entertaining enough but it is what we have all seen before in numerous other films. The thing I like about it is that it doesn't try to be anything too ambitious or over the top and throughout the film, it keeps a constant and steady pace. the film is around 1 and half hour long and while it could have been a bit longer it was very well done.Some of the issues I did have was that some of the English-language was a bit hard to hear, especially from the Mexicans or whoever they were. Some lines were mumbled or a bit too fast and I got annoyed in certain parts. And yes, my hearing is fine.Overall, it was nice action film to watch that didn't have a dumb story like lots of films today. Gibson has left a mark for people to see that he isn't going to be disappearing anytime soon and that he will still continue amazing us. While the film isn't going to gross much, those who do see it will like it.'Over and out.' 13 May 2012

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-27

ur12408862

title: Mel Gibson kicks some ass! review: Get the Gringo. Strange title. Hasn't been released in Australia or America, I'm glad I got the chance to watch this movie. Right from the start, the movie kicks off with a good, ol' car chase. The chase scene is quite fun to watch and it results in the capture of Gibson's unnamed character who is then thrown into a prison. Mind you, it is not a typical lights out at 10 sorta prison film but rather the prison has its own rules and to be honest, there aren't that much rules. For starters, the prison houses both males and females, adults and children, and the inmates can carry guns. Gibson is thrown into the prison and makes friends with a young boy with a knack for smoking. The two then work together to survive the harsh conditions inside the facility.Mel Gibson is back to kicking ass and being cool. No doubt he is the highlight of the show and it is great to watch him being in one of his better roles in recent years. I think it is safe to say that he is better here than he was at 'The Beaver'. But anyway, Mel acts very cool and charismatic and his character is very likable. While the film may not star major or well-known actors, they aren't too bad. The kid he teams up with isn't too bad in this film and he is quite an alright kid. Kevin Hernandez has potential to be a great actor. It also stars Dean Norris, from Breaking Bad, who has a small but appreciated cameo in the film. This is Adrian Grunberg's directorial debut and he pulls of a fun, sort-of smart, and stylish action film.The action in the film is entertaining enough but it is what we have all seen before in numerous other films. The thing I like about it is that it doesn't try to be anything too ambitious or over the top and throughout the film, it keeps a constant and steady pace. the film is around 1 and half hour long and while it could have been a bit longer it was very well done.Some of the issues I did have was that some of the English-language was a bit hard to hear, especially from the Mexicans or whoever they were. Some lines were mumbled or a bit too fast and I got annoyed in certain parts. And yes, my hearing is fine.Overall, it was nice action film to watch that didn't have a dumb story like lots of films today. Gibson has left a mark for people to see that he isn't going to be disappearing anytime soon and that he will still continue amazing us. While the film isn't going to gross much, those who do see it will like it.'Over and out.' 13 May 2012

Mel Gibson's still got it.

tt1567609

Right from the start, you get that "Payback" feeling. A crime gone wrong, the witty loner protagonist, some plotting, the (often needless) voice-over narrative, and an R-rating.It's not "Payback" though, but still pretty close even when considering the main setting/location is a weird prison that looks like a crappy and dirty flee market.This film is not overly smart, not even too exciting and the trashy surroundings can bother some people, but it manages to be good. Mainly because of good old Mel. Mel Gibson is great, he carries the whole movie like a pro. He's really fun to watch and I love to see him in a movie after all this time. He's in a good enough shape, handles the serious moments well but I love it best when he delivers humor in a way that puts many actors to shame. Those little touches in many scenes, they made me smile and remember the golden age of action movies.Kevin Hernandez plays the "kid sidekick", and it's notable how he didn't irritate me. It's very hard to include a child character in a this kind of movie that doesn't feel forced, annoying and unnecessary. So congratulations, Kevin, you did well.The violence is course as fun and ugly as it should. Plenty of blood and grit, no PG13-pudding for children. There is a humorous undertone to the movie and to its violence, but it doesn't ruin the experience - instead, it balances everything nicely. This is not an action comedy (a genre that makes me cringe), but it's still fun enough to the point where everything just clicks.My biggest problems would be about the story and some needless things. The story in itself isn't very engaging, the voice-over felt a little stupid at times, and some characters seem to exist only to deliver some useless little twists to scenes that didn't deed them. The soundtrack didn't win me over either.That said, "Get the gringo" is a good, simple old-school action thriller with some humorous moments and enjoyable as such. No CGI-candy, just plain dirty non-polished surroundings, sets, stunts, bullets, sweat and cigarettes. And of course, Mel Gibson. Not a modern masterpiece of the genre, but I'm glad I got in on blu-ray nonetheless.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-124

ur10844919

title: Mel Gibson's still got it. review: Right from the start, you get that "Payback" feeling. A crime gone wrong, the witty loner protagonist, some plotting, the (often needless) voice-over narrative, and an R-rating.It's not "Payback" though, but still pretty close even when considering the main setting/location is a weird prison that looks like a crappy and dirty flee market.This film is not overly smart, not even too exciting and the trashy surroundings can bother some people, but it manages to be good. Mainly because of good old Mel. Mel Gibson is great, he carries the whole movie like a pro. He's really fun to watch and I love to see him in a movie after all this time. He's in a good enough shape, handles the serious moments well but I love it best when he delivers humor in a way that puts many actors to shame. Those little touches in many scenes, they made me smile and remember the golden age of action movies.Kevin Hernandez plays the "kid sidekick", and it's notable how he didn't irritate me. It's very hard to include a child character in a this kind of movie that doesn't feel forced, annoying and unnecessary. So congratulations, Kevin, you did well.The violence is course as fun and ugly as it should. Plenty of blood and grit, no PG13-pudding for children. There is a humorous undertone to the movie and to its violence, but it doesn't ruin the experience - instead, it balances everything nicely. This is not an action comedy (a genre that makes me cringe), but it's still fun enough to the point where everything just clicks.My biggest problems would be about the story and some needless things. The story in itself isn't very engaging, the voice-over felt a little stupid at times, and some characters seem to exist only to deliver some useless little twists to scenes that didn't deed them. The soundtrack didn't win me over either.That said, "Get the gringo" is a good, simple old-school action thriller with some humorous moments and enjoyable as such. No CGI-candy, just plain dirty non-polished surroundings, sets, stunts, bullets, sweat and cigarettes. And of course, Mel Gibson. Not a modern masterpiece of the genre, but I'm glad I got in on blu-ray nonetheless.

Gibson Raises Mel-hem in Mexico!!!

tt1567609

Mel Gibson is back in top form as a gimlet-eyed career criminal in freshman director Adrian Grunberg's "Get the Gringo," a gritty, gory, hard-boiled crime thriller set inside a corrupt Mexican prison where anything goes. Good movies don't dawdle, and rarely does this bullet-riddled, shoot'em up about life behind bars telegraph its next move. Any prison where an inmate's family can move in with him while he serves time is pretty unusual. The prison resembles something out of a bloodthirsty Robert Rodriguez actioneer. Men come and go with loaded weapons in plain sight. You can even shell out bucks for a shot of heroin administered by needle in a grungy shop. Everything in this replica of Tijuana's El Pueblito has a price. "You can buy anything," asserts one character, "except your way out." As an anonymous convict, Gibson provides the kind of voice-over we usually hear in a loquacious Martin Scorsese film. Gibson's sarcastic commentary about the prison with its unusual routines and procedures highlights the surreal nature of the squalid setting.You never really know for certain where things are heading in this violent, amoral, tongue-in-cheek, 95-minute melodrama. "Get the Gringo" opens with Driver (Mel Gibson of "Payback") and his mortally wounded partner in clown costumes careening down a highway with the cops in close pursuit. Anybody who has seen Quentin Tarantino's "Reservoir Dogs" might find this opening rather familiar, but the resemblance ends quickly. Desperately, Driver plows his car through the border fence, and Mexican police arrest him. The Texas police try to persuade the Mexicans to remand him into their custody. One glance at two duffel bags bulging with millions in cash prompts the Mexicans to keep Driver on their side of the line. Once Driver lands in the big house, he gets chummy with a 10-year-old kid (Kevin Hernandez of "The Sitter") who is plotting to exact revenge on another criminal, Javi (Daniel Gimenez Cacho of "Cronos"), who killed his father. The 10-year old's mother and father were incarcerated for selling narcotics. Initially, Driver uses cigarettes to bribe the youngster into silence. You see, the urchin saw Driver rob a fat, slimy heroin dealer after he set a fire to create a distraction.Before long Driver's nemesis, Frank (Peter Stormare of "The Million Dollar Hotel"), dispatches professional killers to ferret out the millions that Driver stole. They track down the crooked cops who arrested Driver and start amputating toes to loosen their tongues. Meantime, Driver struggles inside the prison to gain Javi's confidence and engineer a deal so he can get out, return to America, and plug Frank. Driver has no respect for anybody but himself, and he abhors Javi with a passion after he learns why the prison kingpin has singled out the 10-year old for preferential treatment. As it turns out, the youth has a liver compatible with Javi's blood type, and Javi needs a fresh liver. Javi hires a surgeon (Patrick Bauchau of "A View to a Kill") to harvest the youngster's liver and transplant it into his body. Interestingly, "Get the Gringo" could be compared to the silent Charles Chaplin comedy "The Kid" because an adult sets out to help a less fortunate child. Indeed, aside from the urchin who befriends him, Gibson is as virtuous as Saint Peter compared with the murderous malcontents who populate the prison. The suspense mounts as Driver plans to kill Frank and get back to the prison in time to save the child.At one point, three gunmen stroll into the prison and try to ice Driver. When the gunfire erupts, they hit everybody but Driver. Bodies litter the premises. The Warden (Fernando Becerril of "Ravenous") informs Javi that the government plans to shut them down as a consequence of the gunfight. Of course, the whole point to any prison picture is how the hero manages to escape. Happily, Gibson survives with everything intact, while the treacherous villains bite the dust. Grunberg orchestrates several chaotic shoot-outs, and Gibson is by no means a typical convict. When they fingerprint him, Mexican authorities discover that he has burned off his fingerprints. Everybody is out to take advantage of Driver, including some greedy Americans. Nevertheless, agile-minded Driver turns the tables on everybody."Blackout" production designer Bernardo Trujillo has performed miracles with the closed down Veracruz prison where the film was lensed on location. Grunberg and he have managed to recreate a world teeming with the dredges of humanity, a microcosm of Hell, where men degenerate into brutish savages and display no qualms about killing each other. Basically, what you've got is Darwin's survival of the fittest in the worst place on Earth. Nevertheless, this miserable hell hole turns out to be a paradise ripe for the plucking for the cynical Driver. Although Gibson qualifies as the hero, he is very anti-heroic. He makes no apologies about being on the wrong side of the law. He admits that he tried to kill his worthless father and that put him in prison the first time.Initially, "Get the Gringo" was entitled "How I Spent My Summer Vacation." At least the latter title has some irony, but "Get the Gringo" gets to the point quicker and summarizes the action. Director Adrian Grunberg gives a good account of himself. The prison setting looks thoroughly authentic, and Grunberg relies on Mexican music to evoke the culture. Fans of Mel Gibson who haven't seen him in a gripping action thriller since his "Lethal Weapon" days won't feel like they have been shortchanged. Gibson has done nothing like "Get the Gringo," and no Hollywood epic has depicted life behind bars as "Get the Gringo." Life below the border has never been presented so pungently unless you've seen something comparable like Luis Buñuel's 1950 crime movie "The Young and the Damned." Incidentally, although this film showing in theaters in the rest of the world, "Get the Gringo" is available in America only as a video-on-demand through Direct TV.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-7

ur2079400

title: Gibson Raises Mel-hem in Mexico!!! review: Mel Gibson is back in top form as a gimlet-eyed career criminal in freshman director Adrian Grunberg's "Get the Gringo," a gritty, gory, hard-boiled crime thriller set inside a corrupt Mexican prison where anything goes. Good movies don't dawdle, and rarely does this bullet-riddled, shoot'em up about life behind bars telegraph its next move. Any prison where an inmate's family can move in with him while he serves time is pretty unusual. The prison resembles something out of a bloodthirsty Robert Rodriguez actioneer. Men come and go with loaded weapons in plain sight. You can even shell out bucks for a shot of heroin administered by needle in a grungy shop. Everything in this replica of Tijuana's El Pueblito has a price. "You can buy anything," asserts one character, "except your way out." As an anonymous convict, Gibson provides the kind of voice-over we usually hear in a loquacious Martin Scorsese film. Gibson's sarcastic commentary about the prison with its unusual routines and procedures highlights the surreal nature of the squalid setting.You never really know for certain where things are heading in this violent, amoral, tongue-in-cheek, 95-minute melodrama. "Get the Gringo" opens with Driver (Mel Gibson of "Payback") and his mortally wounded partner in clown costumes careening down a highway with the cops in close pursuit. Anybody who has seen Quentin Tarantino's "Reservoir Dogs" might find this opening rather familiar, but the resemblance ends quickly. Desperately, Driver plows his car through the border fence, and Mexican police arrest him. The Texas police try to persuade the Mexicans to remand him into their custody. One glance at two duffel bags bulging with millions in cash prompts the Mexicans to keep Driver on their side of the line. Once Driver lands in the big house, he gets chummy with a 10-year-old kid (Kevin Hernandez of "The Sitter") who is plotting to exact revenge on another criminal, Javi (Daniel Gimenez Cacho of "Cronos"), who killed his father. The 10-year old's mother and father were incarcerated for selling narcotics. Initially, Driver uses cigarettes to bribe the youngster into silence. You see, the urchin saw Driver rob a fat, slimy heroin dealer after he set a fire to create a distraction.Before long Driver's nemesis, Frank (Peter Stormare of "The Million Dollar Hotel"), dispatches professional killers to ferret out the millions that Driver stole. They track down the crooked cops who arrested Driver and start amputating toes to loosen their tongues. Meantime, Driver struggles inside the prison to gain Javi's confidence and engineer a deal so he can get out, return to America, and plug Frank. Driver has no respect for anybody but himself, and he abhors Javi with a passion after he learns why the prison kingpin has singled out the 10-year old for preferential treatment. As it turns out, the youth has a liver compatible with Javi's blood type, and Javi needs a fresh liver. Javi hires a surgeon (Patrick Bauchau of "A View to a Kill") to harvest the youngster's liver and transplant it into his body. Interestingly, "Get the Gringo" could be compared to the silent Charles Chaplin comedy "The Kid" because an adult sets out to help a less fortunate child. Indeed, aside from the urchin who befriends him, Gibson is as virtuous as Saint Peter compared with the murderous malcontents who populate the prison. The suspense mounts as Driver plans to kill Frank and get back to the prison in time to save the child.At one point, three gunmen stroll into the prison and try to ice Driver. When the gunfire erupts, they hit everybody but Driver. Bodies litter the premises. The Warden (Fernando Becerril of "Ravenous") informs Javi that the government plans to shut them down as a consequence of the gunfight. Of course, the whole point to any prison picture is how the hero manages to escape. Happily, Gibson survives with everything intact, while the treacherous villains bite the dust. Grunberg orchestrates several chaotic shoot-outs, and Gibson is by no means a typical convict. When they fingerprint him, Mexican authorities discover that he has burned off his fingerprints. Everybody is out to take advantage of Driver, including some greedy Americans. Nevertheless, agile-minded Driver turns the tables on everybody."Blackout" production designer Bernardo Trujillo has performed miracles with the closed down Veracruz prison where the film was lensed on location. Grunberg and he have managed to recreate a world teeming with the dredges of humanity, a microcosm of Hell, where men degenerate into brutish savages and display no qualms about killing each other. Basically, what you've got is Darwin's survival of the fittest in the worst place on Earth. Nevertheless, this miserable hell hole turns out to be a paradise ripe for the plucking for the cynical Driver. Although Gibson qualifies as the hero, he is very anti-heroic. He makes no apologies about being on the wrong side of the law. He admits that he tried to kill his worthless father and that put him in prison the first time.Initially, "Get the Gringo" was entitled "How I Spent My Summer Vacation." At least the latter title has some irony, but "Get the Gringo" gets to the point quicker and summarizes the action. Director Adrian Grunberg gives a good account of himself. The prison setting looks thoroughly authentic, and Grunberg relies on Mexican music to evoke the culture. Fans of Mel Gibson who haven't seen him in a gripping action thriller since his "Lethal Weapon" days won't feel like they have been shortchanged. Gibson has done nothing like "Get the Gringo," and no Hollywood epic has depicted life behind bars as "Get the Gringo." Life below the border has never been presented so pungently unless you've seen something comparable like Luis Buñuel's 1950 crime movie "The Young and the Damned." Incidentally, although this film showing in theaters in the rest of the world, "Get the Gringo" is available in America only as a video-on-demand through Direct TV.

My favorite film of the year so far

tt1567609

¨If I was going to survive in this place it was time to do what I was good at.¨ People in Hollywood need to stop boycotting Mel Gibson's movies because Get the Gringo is the best film I've seen this year. Gibson is back doing what he does best: mixing sarcastic comedy with lots of action. Gibson starred in Foster's surprisingly good film The Beaver last year and everyone ignored it, and now this film gets a direct to DVD release. This movie is a lot better than most films playing in the theaters now and I found it to be the best one of 2012 so far so by all means go see this because you won't be disappointed. Some people are even saying this works as sort of a sequel to Payback, but I think it is actually a lot better. Mel Gibson is at his best once again and never ceases to entertain as he's narrating his experience in a unique prison in Mexico called ¨El Pueblito.¨ Gibson hasn't starred in many films in the last decade (since his work in Signs he's only been in three films including this one) and he seems to choose his roles carefully because each one has been great. He also co-wrote the film alongside first time director Adrian Grunberg who had previously worked as a first assistant director with Gibson in other movies. Stacy Perskie also co-wrote the screenplay which I happened to find very inventive and funny, I really liked the sarcasm and comedy in this film. Perskie and Grunberg had both worked together as assistants in Man on Fire, a movie I found very similar to this one in many ways.Mel Gibson plays the gringo whose name we never really hear (following the same tradition from The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, and last year's Drive starring Ryan Gosling). The film begins with a car chase between two men dressed up as clowns and police officials who are opening fire on these men. One of the clowns happens to be Mel's character and he has just stole a lot of money from some sort of a mafia king. With no other escape the gringo has to cross the border to Mexico where a couple of police officers are also waiting to make the arrest. Seeing all the money in the car, the Mexican officials don't allow the Americans to enter and so keep the money for themselves and put the gringo in prison. This prison happens to be very unique since it is controlled by an inmate name Javi (Daniel Gimenez Cacho). His family, including his brother Caracas (Jesus Ochoa) helps him run the place. The prison works like a small town where you can buy things at a store or even rent your own room. Prisoners also have their family living with them so you see a lot of kids around the place. The gringo meets a nine year old kid played by Kevin Hernandez, who he befriends. The kid teaches the gringo how the prison works. The kid's mom (Dolores Heredia) doesn't like Mel's character at first, but after seeing how he cares for her kid she realizes that he's a good person. The gringo realizes that everyone treats the kid well in the prison and will soon discover why. He not only has to learn how to survive in that dangerous prison, but also try to recover the money that he stole, and help the kid get out as well.Get the Gringo is a really entertaining film with good amount of laughs and action sequences. It has some Man on Fire elements and I would even go as far as to saying that it has the classic Tarantino setting. There is one scene where we see a shootout that reminded me a lot of his films. I really enjoyed this movie and thought Mel Gibson was great in it. The kid, Kevin Hernandez was also really good and had great chemistry with Mel. The movie not only works as an action film, but it also has some elements from the buddy comedy genre. This unlikely duo between the kid and Mel is what makes the film stand out even more. We root for Mel's character because even though he's a thief he's better than the rest of the criminals and corrupt officials. This is my favorite film of the year so far and I really wish more people had the opportunity to see it because it is a lot of fun. Please give Mel Gibson a break and let him do what he does best: make movies without judging him for his personal life.http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-40

ur13566917

title: My favorite film of the year so far review: ¨If I was going to survive in this place it was time to do what I was good at.¨ People in Hollywood need to stop boycotting Mel Gibson's movies because Get the Gringo is the best film I've seen this year. Gibson is back doing what he does best: mixing sarcastic comedy with lots of action. Gibson starred in Foster's surprisingly good film The Beaver last year and everyone ignored it, and now this film gets a direct to DVD release. This movie is a lot better than most films playing in the theaters now and I found it to be the best one of 2012 so far so by all means go see this because you won't be disappointed. Some people are even saying this works as sort of a sequel to Payback, but I think it is actually a lot better. Mel Gibson is at his best once again and never ceases to entertain as he's narrating his experience in a unique prison in Mexico called ¨El Pueblito.¨ Gibson hasn't starred in many films in the last decade (since his work in Signs he's only been in three films including this one) and he seems to choose his roles carefully because each one has been great. He also co-wrote the film alongside first time director Adrian Grunberg who had previously worked as a first assistant director with Gibson in other movies. Stacy Perskie also co-wrote the screenplay which I happened to find very inventive and funny, I really liked the sarcasm and comedy in this film. Perskie and Grunberg had both worked together as assistants in Man on Fire, a movie I found very similar to this one in many ways.Mel Gibson plays the gringo whose name we never really hear (following the same tradition from The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, and last year's Drive starring Ryan Gosling). The film begins with a car chase between two men dressed up as clowns and police officials who are opening fire on these men. One of the clowns happens to be Mel's character and he has just stole a lot of money from some sort of a mafia king. With no other escape the gringo has to cross the border to Mexico where a couple of police officers are also waiting to make the arrest. Seeing all the money in the car, the Mexican officials don't allow the Americans to enter and so keep the money for themselves and put the gringo in prison. This prison happens to be very unique since it is controlled by an inmate name Javi (Daniel Gimenez Cacho). His family, including his brother Caracas (Jesus Ochoa) helps him run the place. The prison works like a small town where you can buy things at a store or even rent your own room. Prisoners also have their family living with them so you see a lot of kids around the place. The gringo meets a nine year old kid played by Kevin Hernandez, who he befriends. The kid teaches the gringo how the prison works. The kid's mom (Dolores Heredia) doesn't like Mel's character at first, but after seeing how he cares for her kid she realizes that he's a good person. The gringo realizes that everyone treats the kid well in the prison and will soon discover why. He not only has to learn how to survive in that dangerous prison, but also try to recover the money that he stole, and help the kid get out as well.Get the Gringo is a really entertaining film with good amount of laughs and action sequences. It has some Man on Fire elements and I would even go as far as to saying that it has the classic Tarantino setting. There is one scene where we see a shootout that reminded me a lot of his films. I really enjoyed this movie and thought Mel Gibson was great in it. The kid, Kevin Hernandez was also really good and had great chemistry with Mel. The movie not only works as an action film, but it also has some elements from the buddy comedy genre. This unlikely duo between the kid and Mel is what makes the film stand out even more. We root for Mel's character because even though he's a thief he's better than the rest of the criminals and corrupt officials. This is my favorite film of the year so far and I really wish more people had the opportunity to see it because it is a lot of fun. Please give Mel Gibson a break and let him do what he does best: make movies without judging him for his personal life.http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

Good action, nice story, and great to have Mel Gibson back on the screen...

tt1567609

Mel Gibson is indeed back from a slump of some bad years recently. But wow, I must admit that he is back in top shape, and back like in the good old days before he ran face-first into the bad media publicity. Mel Gibson is back with his characteristic wits, charms, action, funny comments and lovable demeanor.Watching "Get the Gringo" was like watching the movies that Mel Gibson used to make back in the 90s. There is a really good storyline in this movie, one that it very easy to follow, it is compelling and interesting and it has a good amount of action to it as well. Driver (played by Mel Gibson) is being chased by American police and ends up crashing through the American/Mexican border, getting caught by corrupt Mexican police and sent to prison, while they take all the money for themselves. But Mexican prison is not what he expected, and in order to get back out and get revenge on the ones that screwed him over, he have to make friends and allies in the most unlikely of places.I found the story to be great and I was deeply immersed into it. I liked the feel of the prison, it was so surreal. I can't say that I am overly familiar with how prison works there in Mexico, but this was just out of the ordinary.And I thoroughly enjoyed seeing Mel Gibson back on the screen, but in front of the camera and behind the camera. Hopefully this will be the standard of what the future will hold from him.Thumbs way up for "Get the Gringo".

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-55

ur22654354

title: Good action, nice story, and great to have Mel Gibson back on the screen... review: Mel Gibson is indeed back from a slump of some bad years recently. But wow, I must admit that he is back in top shape, and back like in the good old days before he ran face-first into the bad media publicity. Mel Gibson is back with his characteristic wits, charms, action, funny comments and lovable demeanor.Watching "Get the Gringo" was like watching the movies that Mel Gibson used to make back in the 90s. There is a really good storyline in this movie, one that it very easy to follow, it is compelling and interesting and it has a good amount of action to it as well. Driver (played by Mel Gibson) is being chased by American police and ends up crashing through the American/Mexican border, getting caught by corrupt Mexican police and sent to prison, while they take all the money for themselves. But Mexican prison is not what he expected, and in order to get back out and get revenge on the ones that screwed him over, he have to make friends and allies in the most unlikely of places.I found the story to be great and I was deeply immersed into it. I liked the feel of the prison, it was so surreal. I can't say that I am overly familiar with how prison works there in Mexico, but this was just out of the ordinary.And I thoroughly enjoyed seeing Mel Gibson back on the screen, but in front of the camera and behind the camera. Hopefully this will be the standard of what the future will hold from him.Thumbs way up for "Get the Gringo".

Morally dubious action movie - reflecting Gibson's own values?

tt1567609

This film starts with a car chase: Mel Gibson, in a clown mask, is being chased by US cops along the border with Mexico. He drives through the fence and is arrested by Mexican cops: his associate (also in a clown mask) is dying, and there are several million dollars in the car. Gibson's (unnamed, other than aliases) character is thrown into a rather odd Mexican jail: it seems to be run by certain prisoners as a small town, firearms are freely available, there is much trade, and attendance seems to be optional. Gibson, while plotting to escape and recover the money (which has been commandeered by corrupt Mexican border policemen), becomes attached to a young lad who lives in the prison with his mother: the lad has been earmarked as a liver transplant donor by one of the powerful leaders of the prisoners. And so it goes on...On one level, this is a vigorous, if improbable, action thriller which powers along fairly well. But, knowing what we now know about the sort of person Gibson is, it becomes difficult to watch his films without giving some consideration to the man behind them (particularly when, as in this case, it is co-written and co-produced by Gibson himself). And, looked at in that light, this film suggests that it is the work of a man completely adrift, with no moral compass to provide guidance. I say this for two interconnected reasons.One is the fact that, as the title indicates, there is an element of jokiness here and, indeed, there are frequent moments in the film which are clearly intended to be humorous. And yet this is actually a rather nasty movie, with a great deal of violence, often graphic and sadistic, and a huge body count, none of which is played for laughs at all.Couple this with the fact that Gibson's protagonist, obviously intended to be a sympathetic audience identification figure (the first-person joky voice-over narration makes this obvious from the start), is actually a man with no redeeming features apart from a highly unlikely inclination to do his best for the boy (while retrieving his stolen money, killing scads of people, and blasting his way to a resolution).Perhaps I'm reading too much into this, but the film seems to be the product of someone who really doesn't comprehend the way people should behave towards each other.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-37

ur7813355

title: Morally dubious action movie - reflecting Gibson's own values? review: This film starts with a car chase: Mel Gibson, in a clown mask, is being chased by US cops along the border with Mexico. He drives through the fence and is arrested by Mexican cops: his associate (also in a clown mask) is dying, and there are several million dollars in the car. Gibson's (unnamed, other than aliases) character is thrown into a rather odd Mexican jail: it seems to be run by certain prisoners as a small town, firearms are freely available, there is much trade, and attendance seems to be optional. Gibson, while plotting to escape and recover the money (which has been commandeered by corrupt Mexican border policemen), becomes attached to a young lad who lives in the prison with his mother: the lad has been earmarked as a liver transplant donor by one of the powerful leaders of the prisoners. And so it goes on...On one level, this is a vigorous, if improbable, action thriller which powers along fairly well. But, knowing what we now know about the sort of person Gibson is, it becomes difficult to watch his films without giving some consideration to the man behind them (particularly when, as in this case, it is co-written and co-produced by Gibson himself). And, looked at in that light, this film suggests that it is the work of a man completely adrift, with no moral compass to provide guidance. I say this for two interconnected reasons.One is the fact that, as the title indicates, there is an element of jokiness here and, indeed, there are frequent moments in the film which are clearly intended to be humorous. And yet this is actually a rather nasty movie, with a great deal of violence, often graphic and sadistic, and a huge body count, none of which is played for laughs at all.Couple this with the fact that Gibson's protagonist, obviously intended to be a sympathetic audience identification figure (the first-person joky voice-over narration makes this obvious from the start), is actually a man with no redeeming features apart from a highly unlikely inclination to do his best for the boy (while retrieving his stolen money, killing scads of people, and blasting his way to a resolution).Perhaps I'm reading too much into this, but the film seems to be the product of someone who really doesn't comprehend the way people should behave towards each other.

Doesn't Disappoint

tt1567609

The Gringo (Mel Gibson) is running from the cops after a theft of millions, crosses into Mexico, is apprehended and thrown into a Mexican prison. He knows who has his money and vows to get it back and get out of jail. There is one thing you know about a Mel Gibson movie and that is he will get his revenge….eventually and this doesn't disappoint. He is in a Mexican prison unlike any that I have ever seen or read about. You see families, drug dealings, tattoo parlors, prostitutes, soda stands etc. It's like a small city with everyone seemingly getting along. There is, of course, a vicious pecking order within and this Gringo has to learn the ropes and he does so with the help of a 10-year old boy (Kevin Hernandez). The boy's father was killed for his liver and the boy knows it is just a matter of time before his liver (also a match) is also taken by the leader of the prison.I must say the fight scenes looked too real and I checked myself into the nearest ER anyway….just in case. For the most part, Spanish is spoken in the prison and there were, at times, too many subtitles that were difficult to read because they didn't stay on the screen long. I should have taken that speed-reading course. However, one day Hollywood will realize that subtitles are not needed. Hey, we get it; they speak Spanish. Duh!The Gringo does narration from beginning to end and this helps fill in some gaps.The dialogues and acting performances are first rate. We feel like we are really in a Mexican prison as the cinematography within appears too real to be a movie set. The pacing is perfect, nothing drags. And, as we go along, we wait for the moment when the Gringo makes his move to set things right. We know it will come. We just have to be patient for a while.Violence: Yes. Sex: No. Nudity: No. Drug use: Yes. Language: Yes, some F-bombs also, not too manyRating: A

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-71

ur15857362

title: Doesn't Disappoint review: The Gringo (Mel Gibson) is running from the cops after a theft of millions, crosses into Mexico, is apprehended and thrown into a Mexican prison. He knows who has his money and vows to get it back and get out of jail. There is one thing you know about a Mel Gibson movie and that is he will get his revenge….eventually and this doesn't disappoint. He is in a Mexican prison unlike any that I have ever seen or read about. You see families, drug dealings, tattoo parlors, prostitutes, soda stands etc. It's like a small city with everyone seemingly getting along. There is, of course, a vicious pecking order within and this Gringo has to learn the ropes and he does so with the help of a 10-year old boy (Kevin Hernandez). The boy's father was killed for his liver and the boy knows it is just a matter of time before his liver (also a match) is also taken by the leader of the prison.I must say the fight scenes looked too real and I checked myself into the nearest ER anyway….just in case. For the most part, Spanish is spoken in the prison and there were, at times, too many subtitles that were difficult to read because they didn't stay on the screen long. I should have taken that speed-reading course. However, one day Hollywood will realize that subtitles are not needed. Hey, we get it; they speak Spanish. Duh!The Gringo does narration from beginning to end and this helps fill in some gaps.The dialogues and acting performances are first rate. We feel like we are really in a Mexican prison as the cinematography within appears too real to be a movie set. The pacing is perfect, nothing drags. And, as we go along, we wait for the moment when the Gringo makes his move to set things right. We know it will come. We just have to be patient for a while.Violence: Yes. Sex: No. Nudity: No. Drug use: Yes. Language: Yes, some F-bombs also, not too manyRating: A

Mel Gibson's Return to Action is Awesome

tt1567609

Anti-Semitic rants, spousal abuse, violent temper tantrums…there is a lot to hold against Mel Gibson, but you can't deny the man was born to make movies. Regardless of everything that's come to light about him in the past few years, he's still a great actor (and director, just not here). I was surprised to see his latest movie wasn't getting any sort of national theatrical release, but I guess this is just Hollywood's means of testing the waters. I imagine this was their way of determining whether he's still got any real box office draw. His last couples of movies haven't done the best and I'm sure someone out there in the business is wondering if he should be relegated to Direct-to-DVD Purgatory. GET THE GRINGO skipped theaters and was released to home video and VOD, and I almost gave it a pass but the reviews coming in from critics were generally positive. In the movie, Mel Gibson is a nameless getaway driver who is picked up by Mexican police after crossing the border following a major robbery. He's thrown into a massive Mexican prison known as El Pueblito, and it's a little different to the hard time he's used to serving. El Pueblito is a criminal community trapped within its walls, overseen by corrupt officials and controlled by criminal overlord Javi from his prison penthouse. The driver meets a streetwise ten-year-old boy who helps him learn the ropes of his new home and tells him of how he came to be a resident of El Pueblito and why he and his mother remain there: Javi.GET THE GRINGO feels like a return to the Mel Gibson we knew and loved from the Lethal Weapon series. He lets loose and has fun here as a career criminal plotting his escape from a hellish Mexican prison, while at the same time developing a fatherly rapport with the unfortunate ten-year-old who crosses his path. It's nice to see Gibson go all out with an action role again after more than a decade. The narration doesn't sit too well, with the driver providing voice-overs through the film. It was one of the few complaints I had. The action of the film is a nice hard R-rated, something that probably would've been softened if sent to theaters to appeal to a wider audience. There's a wicked gunfight in the middle of the movie where the driver is cornered in the street by a few heavily armed gunmen, blood and bodies everywhere. You don't get that with sugar-coated PG-13 action. GET THE GRINGO feels like an old-school action flick, and I dig it. Plus it's a bit of a boost for poor Kevin Hernandez, seeing as how I've only ever seen the kid before in THE SITTER. And no one wants that movie to be the one they're known for. He's actually pretty good here considering that his character actually has some pretty heavy baggage he carries around with him. He pulls it off pretty well.Anyone who's a fan of solid action will enjoy GET THE GRINGO. It's a throwback to the 90's when action stars could drop an F-bomb and spatter the walls in henchmen blood. And it's got Gibson back in wisecracking action mode. There's even Peter Stormare thrown into a minor role as a mob boss for good measure. It looks like a cheaper movie, but I guess without national release the filmmakers needed to be a little more careful on jacking up the budget. The prison looks awesome but you can tell it was shot on digital. It's never enough to pull you out of the action but it's pretty obvious at times. Most action fans will jump into this one pretty easy, and Gibson fans will love that it's his best starring role since WE WERE SOLDIERS. Plus, his return to the action world will get you pumped for his guaranteed-to-be- awesome villainous role in the MACHETE sequel.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-95

ur3947986

title: Mel Gibson's Return to Action is Awesome review: Anti-Semitic rants, spousal abuse, violent temper tantrums…there is a lot to hold against Mel Gibson, but you can't deny the man was born to make movies. Regardless of everything that's come to light about him in the past few years, he's still a great actor (and director, just not here). I was surprised to see his latest movie wasn't getting any sort of national theatrical release, but I guess this is just Hollywood's means of testing the waters. I imagine this was their way of determining whether he's still got any real box office draw. His last couples of movies haven't done the best and I'm sure someone out there in the business is wondering if he should be relegated to Direct-to-DVD Purgatory. GET THE GRINGO skipped theaters and was released to home video and VOD, and I almost gave it a pass but the reviews coming in from critics were generally positive. In the movie, Mel Gibson is a nameless getaway driver who is picked up by Mexican police after crossing the border following a major robbery. He's thrown into a massive Mexican prison known as El Pueblito, and it's a little different to the hard time he's used to serving. El Pueblito is a criminal community trapped within its walls, overseen by corrupt officials and controlled by criminal overlord Javi from his prison penthouse. The driver meets a streetwise ten-year-old boy who helps him learn the ropes of his new home and tells him of how he came to be a resident of El Pueblito and why he and his mother remain there: Javi.GET THE GRINGO feels like a return to the Mel Gibson we knew and loved from the Lethal Weapon series. He lets loose and has fun here as a career criminal plotting his escape from a hellish Mexican prison, while at the same time developing a fatherly rapport with the unfortunate ten-year-old who crosses his path. It's nice to see Gibson go all out with an action role again after more than a decade. The narration doesn't sit too well, with the driver providing voice-overs through the film. It was one of the few complaints I had. The action of the film is a nice hard R-rated, something that probably would've been softened if sent to theaters to appeal to a wider audience. There's a wicked gunfight in the middle of the movie where the driver is cornered in the street by a few heavily armed gunmen, blood and bodies everywhere. You don't get that with sugar-coated PG-13 action. GET THE GRINGO feels like an old-school action flick, and I dig it. Plus it's a bit of a boost for poor Kevin Hernandez, seeing as how I've only ever seen the kid before in THE SITTER. And no one wants that movie to be the one they're known for. He's actually pretty good here considering that his character actually has some pretty heavy baggage he carries around with him. He pulls it off pretty well.Anyone who's a fan of solid action will enjoy GET THE GRINGO. It's a throwback to the 90's when action stars could drop an F-bomb and spatter the walls in henchmen blood. And it's got Gibson back in wisecracking action mode. There's even Peter Stormare thrown into a minor role as a mob boss for good measure. It looks like a cheaper movie, but I guess without national release the filmmakers needed to be a little more careful on jacking up the budget. The prison looks awesome but you can tell it was shot on digital. It's never enough to pull you out of the action but it's pretty obvious at times. Most action fans will jump into this one pretty easy, and Gibson fans will love that it's his best starring role since WE WERE SOLDIERS. Plus, his return to the action world will get you pumped for his guaranteed-to-be- awesome villainous role in the MACHETE sequel.

Gibson's comeback to action is mostly promising

tt1567609

(57%) Gibson goes back to basics in this grimy Mexican set action prison drama. Those out there looking for bullet-ridden action set pieces on a treadmill set to 10 with one after another will find this maybe a bit lacking, as this is a movie that, like Mel's character, wants to use its brains a degree more than its brawn, with much focus on plot, setting, and character. After all that's said and done Mel Gibson is still a strong lead, and the movie is at least somewhat different from the typical action flicks out there making this a decent addition to Mel's back catalogue, even if it is pretty standard stuff in terms of entertainment.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-128

ur54757473

title: Gibson's comeback to action is mostly promising review: (57%) Gibson goes back to basics in this grimy Mexican set action prison drama. Those out there looking for bullet-ridden action set pieces on a treadmill set to 10 with one after another will find this maybe a bit lacking, as this is a movie that, like Mel's character, wants to use its brains a degree more than its brawn, with much focus on plot, setting, and character. After all that's said and done Mel Gibson is still a strong lead, and the movie is at least somewhat different from the typical action flicks out there making this a decent addition to Mel's back catalogue, even if it is pretty standard stuff in terms of entertainment.

Mel Gibson goes GTA in a Mexican prison

tt1567609

Watching this movie was like watching a movie version of "Prison Break" season 3 on adrenaline...Well sorta. It's like watching Mel Gibson go all GTA in a Mexican prison. Now I don't know how accurate this movie is when it comes to portraying Mexican prisons(never been there). But it kinda seems like a cool place to visit, it's like the world's crappiest mall. And it's basically a playground for Mel Gibson's character in this, who is basically a bad guy surrounded by even more villainous bad guys. Which makes Mel Gibson's character in this more likable, because of his surroundings. Kinda like how it was in "Payback" where the tagline was "Get Ready To Root For The Bad Guy". First time around this is actually a entertaining flick, it kinda reminded me of "Crank" except not as crazy but unbelievable as well when it came to the stunts pulled and the scenarios, including the direction of it all. If you want to see a guy in Mexican prison go all GTA, than you just might find this one to have good entertainment value.7.3/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-122

ur22171966

title: Mel Gibson goes GTA in a Mexican prison review: Watching this movie was like watching a movie version of "Prison Break" season 3 on adrenaline...Well sorta. It's like watching Mel Gibson go all GTA in a Mexican prison. Now I don't know how accurate this movie is when it comes to portraying Mexican prisons(never been there). But it kinda seems like a cool place to visit, it's like the world's crappiest mall. And it's basically a playground for Mel Gibson's character in this, who is basically a bad guy surrounded by even more villainous bad guys. Which makes Mel Gibson's character in this more likable, because of his surroundings. Kinda like how it was in "Payback" where the tagline was "Get Ready To Root For The Bad Guy". First time around this is actually a entertaining flick, it kinda reminded me of "Crank" except not as crazy but unbelievable as well when it came to the stunts pulled and the scenarios, including the direction of it all. If you want to see a guy in Mexican prison go all GTA, than you just might find this one to have good entertainment value.7.3/10

Stuck somewhere between an average and great movie.

tt1567609

Guess that lots of people are simply happy to see Mel Gibson back again, in a movie like this. And I'm also glad but lets be fair please, this is by no means a great or highly original/clever movie, even though it still likes to see itself as such.It's fairly obviously that after all of the controversy, Gibson has to start at the bottom of the ladder again. This is a fairly cheap looking and not that it's having a horrible look to it but it still is very obvious that not a lot of money got put into it. Nothing wrong with that of course, as long as the movie is good. And it is good but only just half maybe.On the one hand it is definitely being a maintaining enough crime-action-thriller vehicle for Mel Gibson but it is never a movie that becomes truly a great or surprising one. The story in my opinion was being a bit too simplistic and also definitely far from likely. Besides, the movie could had used some better and more clever twists to it. The sort of stuff that can make these sort of action-crime movies great to watch.Mel Gibson definitely still has it in him. I'm sure that lots of people would had been in doubt about it if Gibson would still be good and convincing enough as a likable tough guy, not just because of all of the controversy surrounding his person but also because of his age. After all, he is starting to get close to his 60's now but he definitely is still as good and convincing in this sort of role as he was 10, 20 and 30 years ago.Perhaps the thing that makes this movie feel a bit simplistic, are its restricted settings. For most of its running time it is taking place inside a Mexican prison, that looks nothing like a prison at all and is more like a small village, in which everything goes. It's also all a bit too ridicules to watch to be honest and the movie doesn't always flow very naturally and the way this entire movie progresses doesn't exactly add to the realism of this movie. This is a bit of a distracting element about the movie and also prevented me from truly ever getting into it, or feel involved with any of its characters.It's a movie that tries to be tough at times, which results in some graphic violence, that however doesn't always feels into tone with the rest of the movie and its main story and characters. This perhaps should had been more of a fun movie instead of a raw and violent one, which it is now.Definitely a maintaining enough movie but nothing you really should be running out for to see. It just isn't quite original or special enough for that.7/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-13

ur1416505

title: Stuck somewhere between an average and great movie. review: Guess that lots of people are simply happy to see Mel Gibson back again, in a movie like this. And I'm also glad but lets be fair please, this is by no means a great or highly original/clever movie, even though it still likes to see itself as such.It's fairly obviously that after all of the controversy, Gibson has to start at the bottom of the ladder again. This is a fairly cheap looking and not that it's having a horrible look to it but it still is very obvious that not a lot of money got put into it. Nothing wrong with that of course, as long as the movie is good. And it is good but only just half maybe.On the one hand it is definitely being a maintaining enough crime-action-thriller vehicle for Mel Gibson but it is never a movie that becomes truly a great or surprising one. The story in my opinion was being a bit too simplistic and also definitely far from likely. Besides, the movie could had used some better and more clever twists to it. The sort of stuff that can make these sort of action-crime movies great to watch.Mel Gibson definitely still has it in him. I'm sure that lots of people would had been in doubt about it if Gibson would still be good and convincing enough as a likable tough guy, not just because of all of the controversy surrounding his person but also because of his age. After all, he is starting to get close to his 60's now but he definitely is still as good and convincing in this sort of role as he was 10, 20 and 30 years ago.Perhaps the thing that makes this movie feel a bit simplistic, are its restricted settings. For most of its running time it is taking place inside a Mexican prison, that looks nothing like a prison at all and is more like a small village, in which everything goes. It's also all a bit too ridicules to watch to be honest and the movie doesn't always flow very naturally and the way this entire movie progresses doesn't exactly add to the realism of this movie. This is a bit of a distracting element about the movie and also prevented me from truly ever getting into it, or feel involved with any of its characters.It's a movie that tries to be tough at times, which results in some graphic violence, that however doesn't always feels into tone with the rest of the movie and its main story and characters. This perhaps should had been more of a fun movie instead of a raw and violent one, which it is now.Definitely a maintaining enough movie but nothing you really should be running out for to see. It just isn't quite original or special enough for that.7/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

" Once in hell, it's best to become friends with the Devil "

tt1567609

Director Adrian Grunberg has teamed up with Actor, producer and screenwriter Mel Gibson to create this gritty, violent but splendid action film called " Get The Gringo. " It's been several years since Gibson has entertained audiences with such an exciting movie. This film is not for the average viewer, but for those of us who expect a movie filled with gut wrenching sequences and a plethora of violent scenes which are Gibson's trademark. The story as given has Mel Gibson playing a get-Away 'Driver' as they try to out-run the U.S. Police on the American side of the Border. Having just robbed a bank of several Million Dollars, Gibson learns his partner has been shot critically as he crashes through the Wall separating the U.S. from Mexico. Once in Mexico, Gibson is arrested and incarcerated in a immense and unusual Mexican prison where life, liberty and even families are for sale. Once inside Mexico , the Driver adjusts to a Dark, smelly, Brutal and dismal existence among derelicts, drug-addicts, prostitutes and even children. In among the minions who exist on the edge of poverty and despair, the Driver finds a 10 year 0ld street-smart ally (Kevin Hernandez) who with his mother team up to help him adjust and plan an escape. Three groups of heavies are out to kill the Driver and confiscate his ill gotten loot, one of which needs a liver transplant. To this end, the boy is very important as he possesses the right Blood type of the Prison Boss. On the outside of his prison, another set of bad guys await the driver and use a corrupt U.S. Consulate to get to him. Among the cast is Bob Gunton, Peter Stormare and Dean Norris. In amongst the field of the lost is beautiful Sofía Sisniega. The movie is filled with wild action scenes one of which is reminiscent of the shoot-out with 'the Wild Bunch.' Gibson and the cast have created what will be seen as time passes, a true Classic which will fit in nicely with Gibsons' growing repertory of great films. Not recommend for the squeamish. ****

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-44

ur3902771

title: " Once in hell, it's best to become friends with the Devil " review: Director Adrian Grunberg has teamed up with Actor, producer and screenwriter Mel Gibson to create this gritty, violent but splendid action film called " Get The Gringo. " It's been several years since Gibson has entertained audiences with such an exciting movie. This film is not for the average viewer, but for those of us who expect a movie filled with gut wrenching sequences and a plethora of violent scenes which are Gibson's trademark. The story as given has Mel Gibson playing a get-Away 'Driver' as they try to out-run the U.S. Police on the American side of the Border. Having just robbed a bank of several Million Dollars, Gibson learns his partner has been shot critically as he crashes through the Wall separating the U.S. from Mexico. Once in Mexico, Gibson is arrested and incarcerated in a immense and unusual Mexican prison where life, liberty and even families are for sale. Once inside Mexico , the Driver adjusts to a Dark, smelly, Brutal and dismal existence among derelicts, drug-addicts, prostitutes and even children. In among the minions who exist on the edge of poverty and despair, the Driver finds a 10 year 0ld street-smart ally (Kevin Hernandez) who with his mother team up to help him adjust and plan an escape. Three groups of heavies are out to kill the Driver and confiscate his ill gotten loot, one of which needs a liver transplant. To this end, the boy is very important as he possesses the right Blood type of the Prison Boss. On the outside of his prison, another set of bad guys await the driver and use a corrupt U.S. Consulate to get to him. Among the cast is Bob Gunton, Peter Stormare and Dean Norris. In amongst the field of the lost is beautiful Sofía Sisniega. The movie is filled with wild action scenes one of which is reminiscent of the shoot-out with 'the Wild Bunch.' Gibson and the cast have created what will be seen as time passes, a true Classic which will fit in nicely with Gibsons' growing repertory of great films. Not recommend for the squeamish. ****

How I spent my summer vacation

tt1567609

Which by the way was apparently the original title of the movie. But somehow they decided they had to change it. You decide which title suits the movie better. Gibson on the other hand can finally report good news. No mug shots or babbling, but a movie that actually is more than decent. Not perfect, but some very nice action scenes (movie starts off with one chase scene, that is "border-line" so to speak).Mel Gibsons character also tries to continue a long tradition of men with no name. For a few pesos or dollars, though it's quite a lot and not just a handful. Movie has some nice dialog and it tries to stay as vague as possible, which is a good thing here. This can be good fun, if you don't think too much and too long about it

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-118

ur5876717

title: How I spent my summer vacation review: Which by the way was apparently the original title of the movie. But somehow they decided they had to change it. You decide which title suits the movie better. Gibson on the other hand can finally report good news. No mug shots or babbling, but a movie that actually is more than decent. Not perfect, but some very nice action scenes (movie starts off with one chase scene, that is "border-line" so to speak).Mel Gibsons character also tries to continue a long tradition of men with no name. For a few pesos or dollars, though it's quite a lot and not just a handful. Movie has some nice dialog and it tries to stay as vague as possible, which is a good thing here. This can be good fun, if you don't think too much and too long about it

Stylish and violent - a well made action film though not for everyone

tt1567609

Basically blacklisted by Hollywood for his reprehensible anti-Semitic utterances, Mel Gibson has decided to continue his movie career without the support of the major film studios (this movie was not released theatrically in the United States). In Get the Gringo, this has resulted in a film with an over the top, not holds barred violence that would almost certainly have been toned down if released by a major studio.Gibson is an American (his real name is never given in the film) who is captured by the Mexican police when he is fleeing American authorities in a car chase along the border. With two million dollars in the car. He is send to El Pueblito, a prison that seems more like a third world slum market hellhole than a place of incarceration. The prisoners live among their families in slum housing conditions, and there is a big square inside with market stands. Of course not every prisoner is equal - basically the prison is run by the top gangster Javi, the prison warden being an employee of him. While learning who's on top of whom, he makes two friends in the jail, a ten year old boy – to whom he gives a cigarette (the kind of scene unlikely to be released by a major studio) and his mother. He learns the little boy has a very important personal grudge against Javi, which helps him plot his next moves. I'm not going to tell more about the plot, but it involves very violent goings-on, including an over the top Peckimpah-style shootout in the prison plaza.Some might criticize Gibson for making Mexico looks very bad – though nothing here shows the brutality of the present drug war there - yet the American characters are not very good either (the most likable characters in the film are Mexican, the 10 year old boy and his mother).For its style and good storytelling (the director is Adrian Grunberg, in his movie debut; Grunberg and Gibson co-wrote), I recommend this – though it is obviously not for everyone.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-82

ur0305809

title: Stylish and violent - a well made action film though not for everyone review: Basically blacklisted by Hollywood for his reprehensible anti-Semitic utterances, Mel Gibson has decided to continue his movie career without the support of the major film studios (this movie was not released theatrically in the United States). In Get the Gringo, this has resulted in a film with an over the top, not holds barred violence that would almost certainly have been toned down if released by a major studio.Gibson is an American (his real name is never given in the film) who is captured by the Mexican police when he is fleeing American authorities in a car chase along the border. With two million dollars in the car. He is send to El Pueblito, a prison that seems more like a third world slum market hellhole than a place of incarceration. The prisoners live among their families in slum housing conditions, and there is a big square inside with market stands. Of course not every prisoner is equal - basically the prison is run by the top gangster Javi, the prison warden being an employee of him. While learning who's on top of whom, he makes two friends in the jail, a ten year old boy – to whom he gives a cigarette (the kind of scene unlikely to be released by a major studio) and his mother. He learns the little boy has a very important personal grudge against Javi, which helps him plot his next moves. I'm not going to tell more about the plot, but it involves very violent goings-on, including an over the top Peckimpah-style shootout in the prison plaza.Some might criticize Gibson for making Mexico looks very bad – though nothing here shows the brutality of the present drug war there - yet the American characters are not very good either (the most likable characters in the film are Mexican, the 10 year old boy and his mother).For its style and good storytelling (the director is Adrian Grunberg, in his movie debut; Grunberg and Gibson co-wrote), I recommend this – though it is obviously not for everyone.

How I Spent My Summer Vacation

tt1567609

I saw the various television trailers for this film at the time of release, and I was glad to see the star of Braveheart was getting back into filmmaking, having also done Edge of Darkness and The Beaver, after all the troubles he has had, and I was looking forward to seeing this quite a lot. Basically after being caught during a robbery of millions of dollars from his boss, an unnamed American criminal known simply as the Driver (Mel Gibson, also writing and producing) is not sent to prison back in the United States, but instead being caught by the Mexican authorities he is taken to a Mexican prison. This prison, called El Pueblito is different from the regular kind however, it is an open space that looks like a village, and in it live the various prisoners that have been arrested, from petty criminals to hardcore drug dealers and killers, and most of them live with their families inside. As the Driver gets to know his way around the town like prison he meets a ten year old Kid (Kevin Hernandez) who knows much more about his surroundings than the American, and as long as he gets cigarettes to stop his craving and some other favours he helps the American learn the ropes to get around the prison. He also explains a key factor, that the Mexican boss (or rather the head criminal) of the prison is in need of a liver so he will not die, but he has a very rare blood type, which explains why all criminals entering the prison had their blood taken, so they will know whether there is a match, and it seems the only matching blood type belongs to the Kid. So it is up to the Driver, also nicknamed by the Mexicans as the Gringo, to stop the criminals from taking the Kid's liver, and of course escape the prison with all the money that he stole, and he has various methods to help him do this. There is some other plot going on as well where the Driver has to get out of the prison and deal with the criminals getting to their lawyers and businessmen, including Thomas Kaufman (The Shawshank Redemption's Bob Gunton), but obviously the liver storyline is much more key to him escaping the prison and helping his young friend and his Mom (Dolores Heredia) who the Driver has feelings for, and of course in the end he does escape the prison, and with his millions of dollars. Also starring Daniel Giménez Cacho as Javi, Jesús Ochoa as Caracas, Roberto Sosa as Carnal, Fernando Becerril as Prison Director, Patrick Bauchau as Surgeon, Tenoch Huerta Mejia as Carlos, Peter Stormare as Frank, Scott Cohen as Frank's Lawyer and Dean Norris as Bill. Gibson gives a cool performance as the criminals with a few tricks up his sleeve and a good amount of wisecracks, and a near spot-on impression of Clint Eastwood for good measure, and the supporting cast members do alright as well, especially Hernandez as the wise little boy. It is simple enough story, almost ignoring the businessmen plot line, but there is plenty of stuff to pack a punch, including some exciting gun play sequences, a chase or two, but there are also the hard-hitting moments that may make you cringe, such as child violence, all in all it is an entertaining action thriller. Worth watching!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-87

ur4248714

title: How I Spent My Summer Vacation review: I saw the various television trailers for this film at the time of release, and I was glad to see the star of Braveheart was getting back into filmmaking, having also done Edge of Darkness and The Beaver, after all the troubles he has had, and I was looking forward to seeing this quite a lot. Basically after being caught during a robbery of millions of dollars from his boss, an unnamed American criminal known simply as the Driver (Mel Gibson, also writing and producing) is not sent to prison back in the United States, but instead being caught by the Mexican authorities he is taken to a Mexican prison. This prison, called El Pueblito is different from the regular kind however, it is an open space that looks like a village, and in it live the various prisoners that have been arrested, from petty criminals to hardcore drug dealers and killers, and most of them live with their families inside. As the Driver gets to know his way around the town like prison he meets a ten year old Kid (Kevin Hernandez) who knows much more about his surroundings than the American, and as long as he gets cigarettes to stop his craving and some other favours he helps the American learn the ropes to get around the prison. He also explains a key factor, that the Mexican boss (or rather the head criminal) of the prison is in need of a liver so he will not die, but he has a very rare blood type, which explains why all criminals entering the prison had their blood taken, so they will know whether there is a match, and it seems the only matching blood type belongs to the Kid. So it is up to the Driver, also nicknamed by the Mexicans as the Gringo, to stop the criminals from taking the Kid's liver, and of course escape the prison with all the money that he stole, and he has various methods to help him do this. There is some other plot going on as well where the Driver has to get out of the prison and deal with the criminals getting to their lawyers and businessmen, including Thomas Kaufman (The Shawshank Redemption's Bob Gunton), but obviously the liver storyline is much more key to him escaping the prison and helping his young friend and his Mom (Dolores Heredia) who the Driver has feelings for, and of course in the end he does escape the prison, and with his millions of dollars. Also starring Daniel Giménez Cacho as Javi, Jesús Ochoa as Caracas, Roberto Sosa as Carnal, Fernando Becerril as Prison Director, Patrick Bauchau as Surgeon, Tenoch Huerta Mejia as Carlos, Peter Stormare as Frank, Scott Cohen as Frank's Lawyer and Dean Norris as Bill. Gibson gives a cool performance as the criminals with a few tricks up his sleeve and a good amount of wisecracks, and a near spot-on impression of Clint Eastwood for good measure, and the supporting cast members do alright as well, especially Hernandez as the wise little boy. It is simple enough story, almost ignoring the businessmen plot line, but there is plenty of stuff to pack a punch, including some exciting gun play sequences, a chase or two, but there are also the hard-hitting moments that may make you cringe, such as child violence, all in all it is an entertaining action thriller. Worth watching!

A Nutshell Review: Get the Gringo

tt1567609

Mel Gibson's return to the big screen in front of the camera recent years seems to be getting back on track. He's taken a large knock for various well publicized and controversial allegations and abuses, but those seem to have taken a back seat like how the lacklustre Edge of Darkness has been largely forgotten for more memorable fare and smaller films like The Beaver, and Get the Gringo, also known as How I Spend My Summer Vacation here. Count yourselves lucky all you Mel Gibson fans who are still out there, we're one of the few countries getting this in the cinemas as the USA had opted for a video-on-demand release instead.Gibson does what Gibson does best as a character here, being the strong, silent type who relies on his brains, brawn and resourcefulness to get out of sticky situations. Innate abilities and a huge dose of luck also play their part in having his nameless Driver attempting to outwit, outlast and outsmart his way past Mexican and American gangsters, crooked cops, and ambiguous agents, in order to regain his freedom after being locked up in a Mexican penitentiary that is a mini-town in its own right, complete with the folks from both sides of the law making strange bedfellows. It's a glimpse into the murky world of corruption where criminals run rampant within the walls that are supposed to restrict their freedom, but instead turning the premises into fiefs of operations.Based on a story written by Mel Gibson, Stacy Perskie and Adrian Grunberg, with the latter making his debut directorial feature after deputizing for numerous films, it has all the ingredients necessary to stand tall amongst this season of summer blockbusters, with a tale that keeps you guessing of the Driver's backgrounds and motivations, which soon dissolve into the basic theme of friendship developed with a nine year old Kid (Kevin Hernandez) who holds a certain secret that keeps him alive within a notorious place, and who may just be Driver's ticket out if the cards get played right. Needless to say the villains here were unfortunately relegated to single function caricatures, but thankfully the plot picks up the pace when we get to witness how Driver and the Kid work their way through the system, with subplots bubbling under the surface ready to explode in frantic rush to the finale.There are some moments that sag though, as Grunberg just cannot lift the film's early act from droning rather repetitively on how tough and gritty the entire corrupt environment is through Driver's voiceovers. We get the point, and it's time to move on, only to find more scenes seemingly adamant in wanting to showcase just how miserable life can get in a corrupt prison system. It took a while to have elements set up and put in place, although you'd get to appreciate the efforts it took to gel all character relationships together, with Grunberg adopting a style especially in the beginning with its quick edits cutting very close to how Tony Scott would have stylistically done it if the latter was at the helm.For all the action that the trailer promises, what truly stood out was a mid section, free for all shoot-em-up complete with its graphical depiction of bullet wounds flying all around, entering and exiting various points of the body, and the requisite slow motion to keep things watchable, not forgetting having the Driver break his cover on his background having to save the Kid and his mother (Dolores Heredia) from gunfire coming at all sides. While conveniently set up, how the Driver wiped his enemies from existence thanks to a little bit of play acting and impersonation became my favourite scenes in the entire film, with Gibson at his element flexing some comedic abilities that just sat through really well and dare I say lifted this film from being just average. Recommended!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-60

ur0317399

title: A Nutshell Review: Get the Gringo review: Mel Gibson's return to the big screen in front of the camera recent years seems to be getting back on track. He's taken a large knock for various well publicized and controversial allegations and abuses, but those seem to have taken a back seat like how the lacklustre Edge of Darkness has been largely forgotten for more memorable fare and smaller films like The Beaver, and Get the Gringo, also known as How I Spend My Summer Vacation here. Count yourselves lucky all you Mel Gibson fans who are still out there, we're one of the few countries getting this in the cinemas as the USA had opted for a video-on-demand release instead.Gibson does what Gibson does best as a character here, being the strong, silent type who relies on his brains, brawn and resourcefulness to get out of sticky situations. Innate abilities and a huge dose of luck also play their part in having his nameless Driver attempting to outwit, outlast and outsmart his way past Mexican and American gangsters, crooked cops, and ambiguous agents, in order to regain his freedom after being locked up in a Mexican penitentiary that is a mini-town in its own right, complete with the folks from both sides of the law making strange bedfellows. It's a glimpse into the murky world of corruption where criminals run rampant within the walls that are supposed to restrict their freedom, but instead turning the premises into fiefs of operations.Based on a story written by Mel Gibson, Stacy Perskie and Adrian Grunberg, with the latter making his debut directorial feature after deputizing for numerous films, it has all the ingredients necessary to stand tall amongst this season of summer blockbusters, with a tale that keeps you guessing of the Driver's backgrounds and motivations, which soon dissolve into the basic theme of friendship developed with a nine year old Kid (Kevin Hernandez) who holds a certain secret that keeps him alive within a notorious place, and who may just be Driver's ticket out if the cards get played right. Needless to say the villains here were unfortunately relegated to single function caricatures, but thankfully the plot picks up the pace when we get to witness how Driver and the Kid work their way through the system, with subplots bubbling under the surface ready to explode in frantic rush to the finale.There are some moments that sag though, as Grunberg just cannot lift the film's early act from droning rather repetitively on how tough and gritty the entire corrupt environment is through Driver's voiceovers. We get the point, and it's time to move on, only to find more scenes seemingly adamant in wanting to showcase just how miserable life can get in a corrupt prison system. It took a while to have elements set up and put in place, although you'd get to appreciate the efforts it took to gel all character relationships together, with Grunberg adopting a style especially in the beginning with its quick edits cutting very close to how Tony Scott would have stylistically done it if the latter was at the helm.For all the action that the trailer promises, what truly stood out was a mid section, free for all shoot-em-up complete with its graphical depiction of bullet wounds flying all around, entering and exiting various points of the body, and the requisite slow motion to keep things watchable, not forgetting having the Driver break his cover on his background having to save the Kid and his mother (Dolores Heredia) from gunfire coming at all sides. While conveniently set up, how the Driver wiped his enemies from existence thanks to a little bit of play acting and impersonation became my favourite scenes in the entire film, with Gibson at his element flexing some comedic abilities that just sat through really well and dare I say lifted this film from being just average. Recommended!

Flat, meaningless last ditch desperate entry for Gibson

tt1567609

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday MorningA criminal (Mel Gibson) is caught with his accomplice as he flees across the US border into Mexico by their authorities. He finds himself thrust into a prison, which upon entry seems pretty harsh but then turns out to be more like a holiday camp. Still, his survival depends on those around him, including a young boy who wants revenge for the death of his father and one of the hoodlums running the joint, who needs a liver transplant. He finds himself hatching an escape plan, where he flees to Hollywood to get some much needed cash.A bona fide star through out the 80,s and 90,s, Mel Gibson's increasingly erratic behaviour and anti semantic rantings and ravings have found him becoming more famous for his life off screen than on it, a sad case who doesn't seem to have made a new film in ages. So he's returned, at the age of 56, with this independently financed piece that couldn't have hoped to have had much more than a minimal chance of blasting him back into the big time.The film lacks any real substance or coherency, with a disjointed story that doesn't seem to go anywhere. My plot summary above is only really what I managed to pick up of it, confusing and messy as it was. Gibson carries it along self assuredly, with his wry voice overs world wearily dragging it along. There is a certain charm and likability to it, coming from the hands of an old hack like Gibson, but it's nothing more than a lukewarm one.Overall, this might be one best suited to killing a lazy Summer's afternoon. **

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/reviews-92

ur0345596

title: Flat, meaningless last ditch desperate entry for Gibson review: STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday MorningA criminal (Mel Gibson) is caught with his accomplice as he flees across the US border into Mexico by their authorities. He finds himself thrust into a prison, which upon entry seems pretty harsh but then turns out to be more like a holiday camp. Still, his survival depends on those around him, including a young boy who wants revenge for the death of his father and one of the hoodlums running the joint, who needs a liver transplant. He finds himself hatching an escape plan, where he flees to Hollywood to get some much needed cash.A bona fide star through out the 80,s and 90,s, Mel Gibson's increasingly erratic behaviour and anti semantic rantings and ravings have found him becoming more famous for his life off screen than on it, a sad case who doesn't seem to have made a new film in ages. So he's returned, at the age of 56, with this independently financed piece that couldn't have hoped to have had much more than a minimal chance of blasting him back into the big time.The film lacks any real substance or coherency, with a disjointed story that doesn't seem to go anywhere. My plot summary above is only really what I managed to pick up of it, confusing and messy as it was. Gibson carries it along self assuredly, with his wry voice overs world wearily dragging it along. There is a certain charm and likability to it, coming from the hands of an old hack like Gibson, but it's nothing more than a lukewarm one.Overall, this might be one best suited to killing a lazy Summer's afternoon. **

Scan is clear, plot properly muddied

tt0405296

In a near-future dystopian society, Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) is an undercover cop hooked on an extremely addictive drug called Substance D (for desertion, desolation, depression, death, you name it). Arctor has infiltrated a gang of low-level drug pushers/smugglers, including Donna Hawthorne (Winona Ryder), Charles Freck (Rory Cochrane), James Barris (Robert Downey, Jr.), and Ernie Luckman (Woody Harrelson), hoping to find out who their supplier is. At the same time, though, Arctor is falling under the deep spell of Substance D himself and is beginning to hallucinate.So Bob's hooked, but he doesn't want anyone at work to know (it might cost him his job). And his boss at work is leaning on Bob to get more information; the boss knows Bob's in the gang, but he doesn't know which of the gang is Bob. Confused? Well, see, here's a nifty little quirk - every undercover agent wears an intelligent suit and mask that is constantly changing: the face, the body, the clothes, everything. Plus, the voice that comes out of the mask is altered, so no one can tell who's inside. This goes for Bob's boss, too. Essentially, the cops know that Bob, known as Officer Fred to his station, is one of the four members of the gang, but they don't know which one, and they don't care.But while Bob's trying to get the goods on the gang, another of their number snitches - Barris. According to Barris, Bob's the leader of the pack, the man in charge, the one responsible for pushing all of the dope. Of course, Barris has no idea that Bob is right there in the room when Barris makes this accusation to Bob's boss. So now Bob's job becomes one of survival - he can't let the police know how deep he is, because he could be implicated much worse than anyone else.I know, I know, this sounds pretty complicated and convoluted, but bear with me - my explaining skills aren't as swift as those of screenwriter (and director) Richard Linklater and author Phillip K. Dick, on whose story this movie's based. The movie's about losing one's identity - who is Bob? Is he Bob, or is he Fred? Is he the owner of the drug, or the ownee? And, he has to wonder, is anyone else he knows actually as they seem, or are Ernie and Charles also in with the police? Is Bob being set up? Substance D is bad. Megabad. Anyone here ever see the movie Naked Lunch? In it, Peter Weller hallucinates he's talking to giant cockroaches. That's one of the many effects of long-term Substance D use. Other side effects include schizophrenia and paranoia; essentially, the two hemispheres of Bob's brain are competing for dominance, and it's messing him up just a teensy bit. People who get to this stage of Substance D use usually wind up in rehab at a place called New Path, which apparently has been very effective in curing what ails ya.Aside from the gripping plot - and it is gripping, just complex enough to maintain your interest without boring the hell out of you - the main draw here is the filming technique that Linklater uses, rotoscoping. The actors were first filmed performing their scenes; then, the scenes were drawn over and computerized. The result is an eerie, lifelike effect; it's like watching an extremely well animated film in which every detail is nuanced, every character fully articulated. Rather than being a distraction or a novelty, though, the technique enhances the movie greatly, taking a fairly straightforward plot and ramping it up chillingly. (As an aside, I think it's the kind of effect Frank Miller and Robert Rodriguez wish they'd achieved with Sin City, which feels laughable next to this masterpiece.) So all in all, this is a wonderful film. Fascinating to watch, riveting, the whole nine yards. There's plenty of suspense and just enough unanswered questions to leave you satisfied in the end. Reeves is perfect for the role, and Ryder's never looked more beautiful. Heck, even Harrelson was outstanding. This is a real treat.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-211

ur0543054

title: Scan is clear, plot properly muddied review: In a near-future dystopian society, Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) is an undercover cop hooked on an extremely addictive drug called Substance D (for desertion, desolation, depression, death, you name it). Arctor has infiltrated a gang of low-level drug pushers/smugglers, including Donna Hawthorne (Winona Ryder), Charles Freck (Rory Cochrane), James Barris (Robert Downey, Jr.), and Ernie Luckman (Woody Harrelson), hoping to find out who their supplier is. At the same time, though, Arctor is falling under the deep spell of Substance D himself and is beginning to hallucinate.So Bob's hooked, but he doesn't want anyone at work to know (it might cost him his job). And his boss at work is leaning on Bob to get more information; the boss knows Bob's in the gang, but he doesn't know which of the gang is Bob. Confused? Well, see, here's a nifty little quirk - every undercover agent wears an intelligent suit and mask that is constantly changing: the face, the body, the clothes, everything. Plus, the voice that comes out of the mask is altered, so no one can tell who's inside. This goes for Bob's boss, too. Essentially, the cops know that Bob, known as Officer Fred to his station, is one of the four members of the gang, but they don't know which one, and they don't care.But while Bob's trying to get the goods on the gang, another of their number snitches - Barris. According to Barris, Bob's the leader of the pack, the man in charge, the one responsible for pushing all of the dope. Of course, Barris has no idea that Bob is right there in the room when Barris makes this accusation to Bob's boss. So now Bob's job becomes one of survival - he can't let the police know how deep he is, because he could be implicated much worse than anyone else.I know, I know, this sounds pretty complicated and convoluted, but bear with me - my explaining skills aren't as swift as those of screenwriter (and director) Richard Linklater and author Phillip K. Dick, on whose story this movie's based. The movie's about losing one's identity - who is Bob? Is he Bob, or is he Fred? Is he the owner of the drug, or the ownee? And, he has to wonder, is anyone else he knows actually as they seem, or are Ernie and Charles also in with the police? Is Bob being set up? Substance D is bad. Megabad. Anyone here ever see the movie Naked Lunch? In it, Peter Weller hallucinates he's talking to giant cockroaches. That's one of the many effects of long-term Substance D use. Other side effects include schizophrenia and paranoia; essentially, the two hemispheres of Bob's brain are competing for dominance, and it's messing him up just a teensy bit. People who get to this stage of Substance D use usually wind up in rehab at a place called New Path, which apparently has been very effective in curing what ails ya.Aside from the gripping plot - and it is gripping, just complex enough to maintain your interest without boring the hell out of you - the main draw here is the filming technique that Linklater uses, rotoscoping. The actors were first filmed performing their scenes; then, the scenes were drawn over and computerized. The result is an eerie, lifelike effect; it's like watching an extremely well animated film in which every detail is nuanced, every character fully articulated. Rather than being a distraction or a novelty, though, the technique enhances the movie greatly, taking a fairly straightforward plot and ramping it up chillingly. (As an aside, I think it's the kind of effect Frank Miller and Robert Rodriguez wish they'd achieved with Sin City, which feels laughable next to this masterpiece.) So all in all, this is a wonderful film. Fascinating to watch, riveting, the whole nine yards. There's plenty of suspense and just enough unanswered questions to leave you satisfied in the end. Reeves is perfect for the role, and Ryder's never looked more beautiful. Heck, even Harrelson was outstanding. This is a real treat.

Strikingly animated, but too much of an idea waiting to be fleshed out and climax...

tt0405296

What primarily keeps your attention in this art-house-ish adaption (from Philip K. Dick's novel) of undercover narc Reeves in a futuristic surveillance-controlled and drug-infested society , is of course the truly striking, unique animation technique that director Linklater has sort of patented ever since "Waking life". Some "unfilmable" movies, especially from sci-fi stories waiting to come on-screen, should be inspired by this! Storywise, though, the number one task here is a very clear anti-drug message that is hammered in repeatedly accompanied by a handful of character studies with some chilling comments of a bleak not-so-distant future... and alas, not terribly much more. So, all in all it's a tantalizing concept and idea, yes, but it's an idea waiting and begging to be fleshed out, go somewhere and climax, and not just drift by... Amusing performances (Downey Jr. in top form, especially) and Thom Yorke on the soundtrack (end credits) are other pluses.5 out of 10 from Ozjeppe

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-273

ur1168730

title: Strikingly animated, but too much of an idea waiting to be fleshed out and climax... review: What primarily keeps your attention in this art-house-ish adaption (from Philip K. Dick's novel) of undercover narc Reeves in a futuristic surveillance-controlled and drug-infested society , is of course the truly striking, unique animation technique that director Linklater has sort of patented ever since "Waking life". Some "unfilmable" movies, especially from sci-fi stories waiting to come on-screen, should be inspired by this! Storywise, though, the number one task here is a very clear anti-drug message that is hammered in repeatedly accompanied by a handful of character studies with some chilling comments of a bleak not-so-distant future... and alas, not terribly much more. So, all in all it's a tantalizing concept and idea, yes, but it's an idea waiting and begging to be fleshed out, go somewhere and climax, and not just drift by... Amusing performances (Downey Jr. in top form, especially) and Thom Yorke on the soundtrack (end credits) are other pluses.5 out of 10 from Ozjeppe

I'm done. I'm done. I'm done. I'm done.

tt0405296

Is entertainment value so much to ask for nowadays that only one out of every twenty movies I see can accomplish it? Likewise, is an original, through-provoking plot just as unreasonable? Out of the near-200 reviews I've written for this website, it seems I repeat those two questions in almost every one. I'm sick of it. While A Scanner Darkly isn't a horrible film, it just leaves me asking those questions once again. Why is this? Because it's typical. It's not so-bad-I-threw-up, but it's just average in every way and form. I guess a few people might find it mildly worth watching, but that doesn't mean it's good. Even skimming over the reviews that gave this a perfect score I didn't see a single person who thought A Scanner Darkly was too far above average. So as I always ask: if it's average, if you've seen it time and time again, was it really necessary to view? You and I could have both used the time we spent watching this movie and done something productive with our lives. Like the laundry. Or bought a pizza. Or spent time with our kids. Or went fishing. Or . . .A Scanner Darkly is your basic druggie movie. It changes nothing to the overall formula and follows all the standard clichés. There is nothing new here at all. People get high and yell at each other, then get paranoid, then their lives fall apart. Who would have guessed? It's elementary stuff.Further into the plot, there is the generic specialized government agency that is supposed to fix the:—insert single futuristic problem here—:and the two story arcs, druggies and government, get intermingled. Again, who would have guessed? I can't go further into to entirely cliché plot without spoiling it, so I won't. I will say, however, that the ending is possibly the most cliché thing I've ever seen in a druggie movie. It's downright pathetic. I completely understood everything about this movie, and I fail to see what makes it so complex that half the people who watch it are left dumb and sucking their thumbs. It just mixes two of the most overused plot-lines in American cinema. It's just a futuristic druggie movie, there is nothing NOT to get.Another major problem I have with A Scanner Darkly is that is takes on one specific problem and doesn't bother with anything else. It builds a world out of one single issue, and that is the only thing that matters in that world. It's the same flaw as Fahrenheit 451, where it assumed the only single problem the futuristic world would have is censorship, nothing else, that was all that mattered. Excuse me, I have to roll on the floor laughing. People, look around. The world today has thousands upon thousands of separate problems that affect everyone. Yes one is drugs. Yes one is censorship. But neither of those things even come close to defining the world's problems. At all. Period. What is the point of Mr. Dick creating his own futuristic world, then only giving it one sole problem and assuming that everything but that sole problem is completely a-okay? It's close-minded. It's the opposite of why Lord of the Rings is remembered. Because Lord of the Rings created its own world, then pumped the entire thing full of problems and situations like real life. And if Dick isn't going for realism, then why is he bothering trying to write (then make a movie adaption) about a realistic problem? It's simply poor storytelling.Likewise, there was next to no entertainment value here. I'm all for films that scar you and drag you through the dirt to make an intelligent point, but A Scanner Darkly was just uninteresting because it lacked an interesting story. People talking, no matter how drugged up they are, rarely makes a good movie. I wished to God I could just turn if off and get on with my life, but if I did that I couldn't write this review. There were so many points in the movie where I just kept thinking: "I'm done, turn it off. I'm done!" As for the rotoscoping. Again, what was the point? I see nothing wrong with it, but I didn't see anything it improved, either. It was just like the rest of the movie: pointless.Though I enjoy reading science fiction, I've never read a Philip K. Dick novel in my life. I've seen a few of his movie adaptations, like Blade Runner, and never saw anything too amazing about their overall stories. So, just as an educated assumption, I fail to see why all the Dick fanboys are . . . well, fanboys in the first place. Having never read the novel, but having read reviews, I can also make an educated assumption that they didn't change much to the story A Scanner Darkly told. So maybe Dick isn't the most interesting author out there. Why do people keep making his stuff movies, then? Really.1/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-276

ur19835265

title: I'm done. I'm done. I'm done. I'm done. review: Is entertainment value so much to ask for nowadays that only one out of every twenty movies I see can accomplish it? Likewise, is an original, through-provoking plot just as unreasonable? Out of the near-200 reviews I've written for this website, it seems I repeat those two questions in almost every one. I'm sick of it. While A Scanner Darkly isn't a horrible film, it just leaves me asking those questions once again. Why is this? Because it's typical. It's not so-bad-I-threw-up, but it's just average in every way and form. I guess a few people might find it mildly worth watching, but that doesn't mean it's good. Even skimming over the reviews that gave this a perfect score I didn't see a single person who thought A Scanner Darkly was too far above average. So as I always ask: if it's average, if you've seen it time and time again, was it really necessary to view? You and I could have both used the time we spent watching this movie and done something productive with our lives. Like the laundry. Or bought a pizza. Or spent time with our kids. Or went fishing. Or . . .A Scanner Darkly is your basic druggie movie. It changes nothing to the overall formula and follows all the standard clichés. There is nothing new here at all. People get high and yell at each other, then get paranoid, then their lives fall apart. Who would have guessed? It's elementary stuff.Further into the plot, there is the generic specialized government agency that is supposed to fix the:—insert single futuristic problem here—:and the two story arcs, druggies and government, get intermingled. Again, who would have guessed? I can't go further into to entirely cliché plot without spoiling it, so I won't. I will say, however, that the ending is possibly the most cliché thing I've ever seen in a druggie movie. It's downright pathetic. I completely understood everything about this movie, and I fail to see what makes it so complex that half the people who watch it are left dumb and sucking their thumbs. It just mixes two of the most overused plot-lines in American cinema. It's just a futuristic druggie movie, there is nothing NOT to get.Another major problem I have with A Scanner Darkly is that is takes on one specific problem and doesn't bother with anything else. It builds a world out of one single issue, and that is the only thing that matters in that world. It's the same flaw as Fahrenheit 451, where it assumed the only single problem the futuristic world would have is censorship, nothing else, that was all that mattered. Excuse me, I have to roll on the floor laughing. People, look around. The world today has thousands upon thousands of separate problems that affect everyone. Yes one is drugs. Yes one is censorship. But neither of those things even come close to defining the world's problems. At all. Period. What is the point of Mr. Dick creating his own futuristic world, then only giving it one sole problem and assuming that everything but that sole problem is completely a-okay? It's close-minded. It's the opposite of why Lord of the Rings is remembered. Because Lord of the Rings created its own world, then pumped the entire thing full of problems and situations like real life. And if Dick isn't going for realism, then why is he bothering trying to write (then make a movie adaption) about a realistic problem? It's simply poor storytelling.Likewise, there was next to no entertainment value here. I'm all for films that scar you and drag you through the dirt to make an intelligent point, but A Scanner Darkly was just uninteresting because it lacked an interesting story. People talking, no matter how drugged up they are, rarely makes a good movie. I wished to God I could just turn if off and get on with my life, but if I did that I couldn't write this review. There were so many points in the movie where I just kept thinking: "I'm done, turn it off. I'm done!" As for the rotoscoping. Again, what was the point? I see nothing wrong with it, but I didn't see anything it improved, either. It was just like the rest of the movie: pointless.Though I enjoy reading science fiction, I've never read a Philip K. Dick novel in my life. I've seen a few of his movie adaptations, like Blade Runner, and never saw anything too amazing about their overall stories. So, just as an educated assumption, I fail to see why all the Dick fanboys are . . . well, fanboys in the first place. Having never read the novel, but having read reviews, I can also make an educated assumption that they didn't change much to the story A Scanner Darkly told. So maybe Dick isn't the most interesting author out there. Why do people keep making his stuff movies, then? Really.1/10

Original But Somehow Lacking

tt0405296

After a while the amazing novelty of live action to animation in reverse formula begins to drag and the opportunity to fully use the new animated look was underdeveloped. The storyline while powerful sputtered in the middle but did manage to recoup itself by the end that in itself could be seen as powerful or conveniently cut short. It's difficult to really capture the total cinematic essence of this movie. Much of the cute animated representations on the screen appearing with fascinating resemblance to the actors - Keanu Reeves, Winona Ryder, Woody Harrelson, and Rory Cochrane while compelling also was somewhat manipulative. Overall, this sci fi production did hit the mark on the essential nature of Phillip K. Dick's darker side with good effect. Seven out of Ten Stars.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-25

ur0972645

title: Original But Somehow Lacking review: After a while the amazing novelty of live action to animation in reverse formula begins to drag and the opportunity to fully use the new animated look was underdeveloped. The storyline while powerful sputtered in the middle but did manage to recoup itself by the end that in itself could be seen as powerful or conveniently cut short. It's difficult to really capture the total cinematic essence of this movie. Much of the cute animated representations on the screen appearing with fascinating resemblance to the actors - Keanu Reeves, Winona Ryder, Woody Harrelson, and Rory Cochrane while compelling also was somewhat manipulative. Overall, this sci fi production did hit the mark on the essential nature of Phillip K. Dick's darker side with good effect. Seven out of Ten Stars.

Finally, another good Dick adaption

tt0405296

I'm a fan of the sci-fi author Philip K. Dick, and eventually I end up seeing all the movies they make from his books. Most of them are just horrible, and even the best of them (i.e. "Blade Runner") have been highly unfaithful to the source. I was a bit reluctant to give this one a chance because I detested the director Richard Linklater's previous exercise in rotoscoping animation, "Waking Life." And then there's the whole matter of one of America's most limited stars, Keanu Reeves.....Thankfully Reeves' limitations and strengths match up pretty much perfectly with the character of Bob Arctor which he plays in this film. Not only does the character match up well with Reeves' style, very laconic and soft-spoken, but he's an Orange County guy so for the first time in years Reeves' accent and SoCal mannerisms are not a detriment.The story is very simple, and the ending itself may be pretty obvious. But it has a lot of doubling back, a lot of self-referential aspects that I suspect will make a rewatch very rewarding. It's the most faithful film I've seen so far in regards to distilling Dick's ethos of paranoia. Nobody trusts anybody else, and well they shouldn't. It's a dystopic future where the good guys have to masquerade as bad guys masquerading as good guys.It was fun to see Winona Ryder up on screen again, even if we didn't actually see her face for all the animation. Woody Harrelson and Robert Downey Jr. are perfectly cast in the roles of Arctor's drugged out friends. Downey seems to be doing his best Hunter Thompson, at no loss to the film.The animation really enhances the movie, since it reflects the veil of separation between different versions of the film's interior reality. It enables the "special effects" to meld perfectly with the rest of the film instead of distracting us from the film images the way that it always does with CGI and other technologies. Also the film is noteworthy in that it's really the first film to capture the feel of Dick's stories, the claustrophobia and paranoia coupled with tacky environments that produce a feeling of painful intimacy.This was a film that I'm sure required a lot of effort, and a lot of invention. I really salute Linklater and everyone else for taking part in such an unprecedented film.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-281

ur0178741

title: Finally, another good Dick adaption review: I'm a fan of the sci-fi author Philip K. Dick, and eventually I end up seeing all the movies they make from his books. Most of them are just horrible, and even the best of them (i.e. "Blade Runner") have been highly unfaithful to the source. I was a bit reluctant to give this one a chance because I detested the director Richard Linklater's previous exercise in rotoscoping animation, "Waking Life." And then there's the whole matter of one of America's most limited stars, Keanu Reeves.....Thankfully Reeves' limitations and strengths match up pretty much perfectly with the character of Bob Arctor which he plays in this film. Not only does the character match up well with Reeves' style, very laconic and soft-spoken, but he's an Orange County guy so for the first time in years Reeves' accent and SoCal mannerisms are not a detriment.The story is very simple, and the ending itself may be pretty obvious. But it has a lot of doubling back, a lot of self-referential aspects that I suspect will make a rewatch very rewarding. It's the most faithful film I've seen so far in regards to distilling Dick's ethos of paranoia. Nobody trusts anybody else, and well they shouldn't. It's a dystopic future where the good guys have to masquerade as bad guys masquerading as good guys.It was fun to see Winona Ryder up on screen again, even if we didn't actually see her face for all the animation. Woody Harrelson and Robert Downey Jr. are perfectly cast in the roles of Arctor's drugged out friends. Downey seems to be doing his best Hunter Thompson, at no loss to the film.The animation really enhances the movie, since it reflects the veil of separation between different versions of the film's interior reality. It enables the "special effects" to meld perfectly with the rest of the film instead of distracting us from the film images the way that it always does with CGI and other technologies. Also the film is noteworthy in that it's really the first film to capture the feel of Dick's stories, the claustrophobia and paranoia coupled with tacky environments that produce a feeling of painful intimacy.This was a film that I'm sure required a lot of effort, and a lot of invention. I really salute Linklater and everyone else for taking part in such an unprecedented film.

Serious play: brilliant result

tt0405296

This most faithful rendition on film of a Philip K. Dick story (of eight so far) is both Richard Linklater's homage to Dick and Dick's homage to himself, his wife, and his friends who were brought down by drugs. Sporting a fine cast whose members themselves have excellent drug credentials, "A Scanner Darkly" moves from the sheer wonder or tsk-tsking of tales like Jonas Åkerlund's "Spun" or Arnovsky's "Requiem for a Dream" toward the supply-demand-punishment nexus relentlessly limned by William S. Burroughs.Burroughs' sexually outrageous phantasmagorias have seemed unfilmable, though Cronenberg gave "Naked Lunch" a good try; but his ideas are clear: the future moves toward totalitarianism, and drugs are an excellent way of controlling masses of people. If they're addicted, they're your slaves; you've got their minds, and you've got their money. If you've got them hooked on something illegal, you've got a nation of outlaws, and hence a police state. But as Burroughs said, it's covert -- though America's huge prison population is increasingly visible. The world becomes one big sting operation. In "A Scanner Darkly," the rulers conceal and rip up identities at will and in the end nobody's safe, but everybody's too wacked-out to care. Except we care, and the movie is trippy, funny -- but also sad.Linklater ingeniously uses rotoscoping (found also in the director's "Waking Life" and a segment of Von Trier's "Five Obstructions"), a complicated computer imaging technique that gives filmed people an overlay of shaky hand-drawn animation -- or, in this case, a crazy web of drug-induced (or governmentally imposed) illusion hovering on the surface of everybody's appearance.Darkly is set seven years in the future, but the images are rich brightly drab Seventies Orange County grunge. Dick's story is as much rueful reflection as sci-fi. It's also comedy, as drug stories often are are, the manic nuttiness embodied in Rory Cochrane as Freck, who imagines himself covered with bugs (rotoscoped all over him); Robert Downey, Jr. (who surely knows whereof he speaks) as the motor-mouthed, jumpy, manipulative Barris; and goofy loose canon Luckman (Woody Harrelson), who might get violent or who pass out any minute, you don't know which. These represent Dick's immediate circle of trusted friends. Or they were trusted. Now addiction to big red pills of an amphetamine-like super drug called Substance D (evidently produced by the same encompassing structure of exploiters that hunts down its sellers and users, whom it infiltrates) has turned them manic and paranoid. The system is eating its tail: the War on Drugs is part of the drug business. "The junk merchant doesn't sell his product to the consumer," Bill Burroughs said, "he sells the consumer to the product." The matrix feeds equally well in all directions. People are bugs stuck in the honey-pot.Exploiter and victim at the center is "Matrix" alumnus Keanu Reeves as Bob Arctor -- friend, doper, and covert agent for the company -- whom however the company is seeking to destroy. He hangs out with his friends and then goes to work and watches scanner images of himself with them. No wonder he knows less and less who he is. Even the corporation he works for doesn't know, though it increasingly suspects, which one of the household he's watching on the scanner he is. Agents of the corporate system that binds the nexus together, such as Arctor, "Fred" to the company, wear a shape-shifting "scramble suit" coating when meeting with their bosses that hides their identity from everyone by making them assume dozens of fractional identities every minute, changing outfit, face, and sex with the flickerings of the rotoscope images. But the flickerings on the people all the time show their heightened but fragmented perception and the splitting of their identities. They're pretending to be who they don't know they are. Luckman tells about a famous imposter who decided the best scam would be to pretend to be a famous imposter. The world of "Scanner Darkly" is like your mind on drugs such as marijuana: you struggle to grasp an idea and when you've almost got it, you forget what it was you were struggling to grasp. The movie captures that -- more than once.Its look is trippy, and though less spectacular than some, this is one of the greatest drug movies, not only because of the intense visuals but because the Dick of this story and Linklater himself are both master delineators of drug thought and drug talk. As in "Spun," linear logic or tidy structure are inappropriate. The movie is episodic and just ends. Highlights are Barris'/Downey's conversation and the friends' argumentative analysis of situations when a bike is found or a car breaks down on the highway. Dick and Linklater capture the hilarity of drugged friends comically bonding at cross purposes with each other, their bicker/banter. But, not atypically for far-along druggies, there's no sex: Donna (Winona Ryder) can't bear for her boyfriend Arctor to touch her. "Fred" (Arctor) is periodically hauled in for testing. They know he's addicted to the stuff he's supposed to be investigating and can see the two hemispheres of his brain aren't working properly any more. It may be Arctor signifies a man at war with his inner Addict. Some reviewers complained about press screening walkouts or inability to follow, but the San Francisco third day audience was warmly appreciative. Dangling abrupt ending? Perhaps, but the key to the treasure is the treasure: getting there is half the fun. Linklater fans, of whom I'm one, must not miss this movie, and it's not just idle play. Nor is it coincidental this came out at Cannes with his other film, "Fast Food Nation." Both are calls to arms that speak to twenty-first-century America. The food industry, the war on drugs, the war on terror are all means of exploitation and repression. Dick's nonsensical word play and Linklater's current film-making are dead serious, and world class American art.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-16

ur1501216

title: Serious play: brilliant result review: This most faithful rendition on film of a Philip K. Dick story (of eight so far) is both Richard Linklater's homage to Dick and Dick's homage to himself, his wife, and his friends who were brought down by drugs. Sporting a fine cast whose members themselves have excellent drug credentials, "A Scanner Darkly" moves from the sheer wonder or tsk-tsking of tales like Jonas Åkerlund's "Spun" or Arnovsky's "Requiem for a Dream" toward the supply-demand-punishment nexus relentlessly limned by William S. Burroughs.Burroughs' sexually outrageous phantasmagorias have seemed unfilmable, though Cronenberg gave "Naked Lunch" a good try; but his ideas are clear: the future moves toward totalitarianism, and drugs are an excellent way of controlling masses of people. If they're addicted, they're your slaves; you've got their minds, and you've got their money. If you've got them hooked on something illegal, you've got a nation of outlaws, and hence a police state. But as Burroughs said, it's covert -- though America's huge prison population is increasingly visible. The world becomes one big sting operation. In "A Scanner Darkly," the rulers conceal and rip up identities at will and in the end nobody's safe, but everybody's too wacked-out to care. Except we care, and the movie is trippy, funny -- but also sad.Linklater ingeniously uses rotoscoping (found also in the director's "Waking Life" and a segment of Von Trier's "Five Obstructions"), a complicated computer imaging technique that gives filmed people an overlay of shaky hand-drawn animation -- or, in this case, a crazy web of drug-induced (or governmentally imposed) illusion hovering on the surface of everybody's appearance.Darkly is set seven years in the future, but the images are rich brightly drab Seventies Orange County grunge. Dick's story is as much rueful reflection as sci-fi. It's also comedy, as drug stories often are are, the manic nuttiness embodied in Rory Cochrane as Freck, who imagines himself covered with bugs (rotoscoped all over him); Robert Downey, Jr. (who surely knows whereof he speaks) as the motor-mouthed, jumpy, manipulative Barris; and goofy loose canon Luckman (Woody Harrelson), who might get violent or who pass out any minute, you don't know which. These represent Dick's immediate circle of trusted friends. Or they were trusted. Now addiction to big red pills of an amphetamine-like super drug called Substance D (evidently produced by the same encompassing structure of exploiters that hunts down its sellers and users, whom it infiltrates) has turned them manic and paranoid. The system is eating its tail: the War on Drugs is part of the drug business. "The junk merchant doesn't sell his product to the consumer," Bill Burroughs said, "he sells the consumer to the product." The matrix feeds equally well in all directions. People are bugs stuck in the honey-pot.Exploiter and victim at the center is "Matrix" alumnus Keanu Reeves as Bob Arctor -- friend, doper, and covert agent for the company -- whom however the company is seeking to destroy. He hangs out with his friends and then goes to work and watches scanner images of himself with them. No wonder he knows less and less who he is. Even the corporation he works for doesn't know, though it increasingly suspects, which one of the household he's watching on the scanner he is. Agents of the corporate system that binds the nexus together, such as Arctor, "Fred" to the company, wear a shape-shifting "scramble suit" coating when meeting with their bosses that hides their identity from everyone by making them assume dozens of fractional identities every minute, changing outfit, face, and sex with the flickerings of the rotoscope images. But the flickerings on the people all the time show their heightened but fragmented perception and the splitting of their identities. They're pretending to be who they don't know they are. Luckman tells about a famous imposter who decided the best scam would be to pretend to be a famous imposter. The world of "Scanner Darkly" is like your mind on drugs such as marijuana: you struggle to grasp an idea and when you've almost got it, you forget what it was you were struggling to grasp. The movie captures that -- more than once.Its look is trippy, and though less spectacular than some, this is one of the greatest drug movies, not only because of the intense visuals but because the Dick of this story and Linklater himself are both master delineators of drug thought and drug talk. As in "Spun," linear logic or tidy structure are inappropriate. The movie is episodic and just ends. Highlights are Barris'/Downey's conversation and the friends' argumentative analysis of situations when a bike is found or a car breaks down on the highway. Dick and Linklater capture the hilarity of drugged friends comically bonding at cross purposes with each other, their bicker/banter. But, not atypically for far-along druggies, there's no sex: Donna (Winona Ryder) can't bear for her boyfriend Arctor to touch her. "Fred" (Arctor) is periodically hauled in for testing. They know he's addicted to the stuff he's supposed to be investigating and can see the two hemispheres of his brain aren't working properly any more. It may be Arctor signifies a man at war with his inner Addict. Some reviewers complained about press screening walkouts or inability to follow, but the San Francisco third day audience was warmly appreciative. Dangling abrupt ending? Perhaps, but the key to the treasure is the treasure: getting there is half the fun. Linklater fans, of whom I'm one, must not miss this movie, and it's not just idle play. Nor is it coincidental this came out at Cannes with his other film, "Fast Food Nation." Both are calls to arms that speak to twenty-first-century America. The food industry, the war on drugs, the war on terror are all means of exploitation and repression. Dick's nonsensical word play and Linklater's current film-making are dead serious, and world class American art.

Only Linklater

tt0405296

It's perfectly clear Richard Linklater is the only one who can make a movie like "A Scanner Darkly"; so full of style, so acceptably changeable, so well written and acted. We can tell if a script is well adapted from a novel whether we've read the novel or not: Linklater's work on Phillip K. Dick's work is really admirable, as it keeps no only the writer's essence in the film, but also his own.What is Dick's essence? Intelligent science fiction that you can sense in some other pictures based on his work. However, some of these pictures forget about the essence and turn the story into 'all action and no talk'. But you tell me what Linklater's essence is…The gift of talk! So, basically, "A Scanner Darkly" is 'all talk and no action".Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) is an undercover cop who needs to take a drug to do his job, but he becomes addicted. That's on the surface, because Linklater develops every dimension of the character's world: his relationship with his colleagues, his friends and his girl; and there's so much talk! Intelligent talk, the one you really need to pay attention to.It would have been so easy for a director to turn this film into street chases and high flying cars that shoot bullets from the air. Luckily, the guy who grabbed the book is much smarter than that. Consider how the director takes on the story's different moods. First, a depression impossible to remove, then a bit of comedy, then darkness, then pure neutrality. Look at the background during each mood. It's not so easy to perceive because of Linklater's inventive animation technique, but when there's comedy you can see the sun; when there's darkness you can't; when there's neutrality you witness a big desolated farm.All these elements play in favor of the movie, same to be said about the talking intervals: Linklater provides minutes of non-stop talking that ecstasy the viewer and suddenly turns everything into observation and silence. Those are things I liked of the film, as I wondered how the actors did to learn their lines. It's the same thought that crossed my mind during "Tape" or "Before Sunset".Ethan Hawke is, surprisingly, not here. Apparently, Linklater wanted the main role for Keanu Reeves and I must say this is one of "Neo's" best portrayals. He shows a complete comprehension of the character that helps us understand the movie. In a movie so charged as this one, there's no better help. For example, Jim Carrey didn't understand his character in "The Number 23" and, although the movie was impossible to understand, he made things more difficult for the viewer.Reeves is pleasantly impressive here; capturing each one of Linklater's moods and delivering a multifaceted performance. Robert Downey Jr. is also part of the ride, with his usual eccentric behavior; Rory Cochrane is eccentrically funny; Woody Harrelson is an innocent and stupid man; and there's also Winona Ryder, whose presence is always more than appreciated.I won't tell you the characters they play though…If you watch this film knowing the less as possible, you may just be as surprised as I was; that the novel "A Scanner Darkly" was written long ago, but its impact is so relevant today, in a world where satellites are watching us all the time and our privacy is about to be destroyed. Maybe it already is.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-245

ur4751428

title: Only Linklater review: It's perfectly clear Richard Linklater is the only one who can make a movie like "A Scanner Darkly"; so full of style, so acceptably changeable, so well written and acted. We can tell if a script is well adapted from a novel whether we've read the novel or not: Linklater's work on Phillip K. Dick's work is really admirable, as it keeps no only the writer's essence in the film, but also his own.What is Dick's essence? Intelligent science fiction that you can sense in some other pictures based on his work. However, some of these pictures forget about the essence and turn the story into 'all action and no talk'. But you tell me what Linklater's essence is…The gift of talk! So, basically, "A Scanner Darkly" is 'all talk and no action".Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) is an undercover cop who needs to take a drug to do his job, but he becomes addicted. That's on the surface, because Linklater develops every dimension of the character's world: his relationship with his colleagues, his friends and his girl; and there's so much talk! Intelligent talk, the one you really need to pay attention to.It would have been so easy for a director to turn this film into street chases and high flying cars that shoot bullets from the air. Luckily, the guy who grabbed the book is much smarter than that. Consider how the director takes on the story's different moods. First, a depression impossible to remove, then a bit of comedy, then darkness, then pure neutrality. Look at the background during each mood. It's not so easy to perceive because of Linklater's inventive animation technique, but when there's comedy you can see the sun; when there's darkness you can't; when there's neutrality you witness a big desolated farm.All these elements play in favor of the movie, same to be said about the talking intervals: Linklater provides minutes of non-stop talking that ecstasy the viewer and suddenly turns everything into observation and silence. Those are things I liked of the film, as I wondered how the actors did to learn their lines. It's the same thought that crossed my mind during "Tape" or "Before Sunset".Ethan Hawke is, surprisingly, not here. Apparently, Linklater wanted the main role for Keanu Reeves and I must say this is one of "Neo's" best portrayals. He shows a complete comprehension of the character that helps us understand the movie. In a movie so charged as this one, there's no better help. For example, Jim Carrey didn't understand his character in "The Number 23" and, although the movie was impossible to understand, he made things more difficult for the viewer.Reeves is pleasantly impressive here; capturing each one of Linklater's moods and delivering a multifaceted performance. Robert Downey Jr. is also part of the ride, with his usual eccentric behavior; Rory Cochrane is eccentrically funny; Woody Harrelson is an innocent and stupid man; and there's also Winona Ryder, whose presence is always more than appreciated.I won't tell you the characters they play though…If you watch this film knowing the less as possible, you may just be as surprised as I was; that the novel "A Scanner Darkly" was written long ago, but its impact is so relevant today, in a world where satellites are watching us all the time and our privacy is about to be destroyed. Maybe it already is.

Engaging, if depressing narcotics thriller

tt0405296

A sci-fi twist on a drugs-bust thriller, told with the interesting animation-conversion device of rotoscoping. The film achieves two things. First, a convincing interpretation of what it might be like to experience perception-altering drugs; second - as in all Philip K Dick adaptations - an assault on an ethical issue under this different status quo.In pursuing the first, rotoscoping is a simple and effective technique. Pictures are rendered elastic and psychedelic, but still we often ask ourselves whether we're actually watching untreated footage. It also allows Linklater to introduce the idea of a suit worn by undercover agents to protect their identities. The thriller element of the film revolves around this: will the protagonists be able to identify one another despite the suits? And does that matter when they are involved with a drug that impairs their ability to identify individuals who are not covert? What's left? What might be left is the hard won denouement of the film. As in Charlie Kaufmann (who prepared an early draft of a script for this film)'s Eternal Sunshine, hope springs from the ability of the protagonists to remember truths that might not be part of their personal memories and experiences but from something more isolated - a categorical imperative, or more simply, a truth.This is all a bit mealy, and Linklater does a good job in pulling off a film that is often funny or at least entertaining. Robert Downey Junior is very good, if often over the top. Keanu Reeves' moody slacker is the ideal attitude for the stoner caught between chemical and metaphysical ennui - Winona Ryder the perfect partner to this. 6.5/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-248

ur2206551

title: Engaging, if depressing narcotics thriller review: A sci-fi twist on a drugs-bust thriller, told with the interesting animation-conversion device of rotoscoping. The film achieves two things. First, a convincing interpretation of what it might be like to experience perception-altering drugs; second - as in all Philip K Dick adaptations - an assault on an ethical issue under this different status quo.In pursuing the first, rotoscoping is a simple and effective technique. Pictures are rendered elastic and psychedelic, but still we often ask ourselves whether we're actually watching untreated footage. It also allows Linklater to introduce the idea of a suit worn by undercover agents to protect their identities. The thriller element of the film revolves around this: will the protagonists be able to identify one another despite the suits? And does that matter when they are involved with a drug that impairs their ability to identify individuals who are not covert? What's left? What might be left is the hard won denouement of the film. As in Charlie Kaufmann (who prepared an early draft of a script for this film)'s Eternal Sunshine, hope springs from the ability of the protagonists to remember truths that might not be part of their personal memories and experiences but from something more isolated - a categorical imperative, or more simply, a truth.This is all a bit mealy, and Linklater does a good job in pulling off a film that is often funny or at least entertaining. Robert Downey Junior is very good, if often over the top. Keanu Reeves' moody slacker is the ideal attitude for the stoner caught between chemical and metaphysical ennui - Winona Ryder the perfect partner to this. 6.5/10

Radiohead fans will love this movie.

tt0405296

For some reason I can't get separate the way I feel about Radiohead's Kid A and Amnesiac albums from the way I feel about this movie. If you love adult sci-fi that is complex and strangely moving then this is a must see movie. This captures Philip K. Dick's spirit better than any movie since BLADERUNNER and is even more difficult to pin a reaction on. SCANNER is a more intimate film. Anybody who has seen Richard Linklater's mind boggling WAKING LIFE will be instantly familiar (and comfortable) with the way SCANNER looks. The rotoscoping technique doesn't seem that much further evolved from WAKING except for the scrambler suit whose effect is a continuous wonder to behold. The look beautifully suits the story because they both speak to the large disconnect that has happened in our society via technology. Interpersonal and immediately accessible intercommunication devices have allowed us to avoid real communication and immediate interaction with our surroundings and the people who inhabit them at any moment on a grander scale than ever before. I find it rather depressing and annoying when my current reality in interrupted by a bloody cell phone (unless, of course, it is mine that is ringing). Dick's work often addressed alienation and sinking so far into your own that reality became a liquid element usually washing us up onto the shores paranoia and madness. SCANNER evokes this strangeness in a way few movies ever have.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-69

ur0116181

title: Radiohead fans will love this movie. review: For some reason I can't get separate the way I feel about Radiohead's Kid A and Amnesiac albums from the way I feel about this movie. If you love adult sci-fi that is complex and strangely moving then this is a must see movie. This captures Philip K. Dick's spirit better than any movie since BLADERUNNER and is even more difficult to pin a reaction on. SCANNER is a more intimate film. Anybody who has seen Richard Linklater's mind boggling WAKING LIFE will be instantly familiar (and comfortable) with the way SCANNER looks. The rotoscoping technique doesn't seem that much further evolved from WAKING except for the scrambler suit whose effect is a continuous wonder to behold. The look beautifully suits the story because they both speak to the large disconnect that has happened in our society via technology. Interpersonal and immediately accessible intercommunication devices have allowed us to avoid real communication and immediate interaction with our surroundings and the people who inhabit them at any moment on a grander scale than ever before. I find it rather depressing and annoying when my current reality in interrupted by a bloody cell phone (unless, of course, it is mine that is ringing). Dick's work often addressed alienation and sinking so far into your own that reality became a liquid element usually washing us up onto the shores paranoia and madness. SCANNER evokes this strangeness in a way few movies ever have.

Do The Scanners See Darkly Or Clearly

tt0405296

Amazingly realized adaptation of Philip K. Dicks semi-autobiographical sci-fi religious allegory, a tale of drugs, paranoia, and friendship in a Southern California dystopian future. "A Scanner Darkly" inverts the police procedural from word go, Keanu ...Reevs plays Archer,a simultaneous drug dealer and undercover police officer who finds he's investigating himself, or is it the other way around?...Archer has become addicted in the field to Substance D(D is for Death), and it's causing massive cerebral damage, causing him to sometimes lose track of which role to assume and when. He lives in a house with two junkie roommates, and receives occasional visits from Winona Ryder as his girlfriend who wont sleep with him. All performers, Robert Downey Jr., Rory Cochrane, and Woody Harrelson especially give amazing performances, becoming completely absorbed in their characters (who if I haven't mentioned by now are all covered in animated cell shading ala director Linklater's earlier "Waking Life"). The animation is much more stable and illustrative than in Waking Life, and the acting and script capture Dicks ear for dialog perfectly.The sci-fi/police procedural element of the film is a dressing, for ruminations on psychological decay and paranoia. The true heart of the film, lies in Archer's interactions with his friends, who double themselves as junkie co-dependents. At some points Archer is aware of the state of his life at others(usually times on substance d), life flows by in the tragi-comic norm common to drug users, a haze absurd episodes, headaches, and sudden bouts of withdrawal sadness. Author of the novel A Scanner Darkly, Philip K. Dick believed and often wrote about a concept called Anamnesis, a Greek word that means "the loss of forgetfulness". Archer is using D. to forget, his life, his job, his identity, and he succeeds, burning out as many before him(look for the list at the credits), he does remember a blue flower. On one level of plot this may crack the drug racket, which is being run by the re-hab center (the way Philip Morris sponsors anti-cigarette Truth commercials, as free advertising), but just as Substance D. is the symbol of death, the blue flower too has its own symbol, so say the Gods of wikipedia.Though it's themes are somber, it's tone is peppered with surreal humor, Woody Harrelson momentarily transforming into a cock-roach, Robert Downey Jr's security system, and the highlight, Freck's suicide, where an inter-dimensional being appears by his bedside to read him his sins, which will last of eternity. A Scanner Darkly is a tragedy of lost friendship and brain cells, it was based on a time the author himself was living with several young people, after leaving his family and between books, he wrote this after leaving rehab(James Frey eat your heart out), and channeled expertly by Richard Linklater whose talent for coaxing spirited, talk heavy, thoughtful performances and pioneering experimental animation blend perfectly. I had the benefit of seeing this the first time in IMAX, an experience I hope I remember to not forget.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-262

ur15982856

title: Do The Scanners See Darkly Or Clearly review: Amazingly realized adaptation of Philip K. Dicks semi-autobiographical sci-fi religious allegory, a tale of drugs, paranoia, and friendship in a Southern California dystopian future. "A Scanner Darkly" inverts the police procedural from word go, Keanu ...Reevs plays Archer,a simultaneous drug dealer and undercover police officer who finds he's investigating himself, or is it the other way around?...Archer has become addicted in the field to Substance D(D is for Death), and it's causing massive cerebral damage, causing him to sometimes lose track of which role to assume and when. He lives in a house with two junkie roommates, and receives occasional visits from Winona Ryder as his girlfriend who wont sleep with him. All performers, Robert Downey Jr., Rory Cochrane, and Woody Harrelson especially give amazing performances, becoming completely absorbed in their characters (who if I haven't mentioned by now are all covered in animated cell shading ala director Linklater's earlier "Waking Life"). The animation is much more stable and illustrative than in Waking Life, and the acting and script capture Dicks ear for dialog perfectly.The sci-fi/police procedural element of the film is a dressing, for ruminations on psychological decay and paranoia. The true heart of the film, lies in Archer's interactions with his friends, who double themselves as junkie co-dependents. At some points Archer is aware of the state of his life at others(usually times on substance d), life flows by in the tragi-comic norm common to drug users, a haze absurd episodes, headaches, and sudden bouts of withdrawal sadness. Author of the novel A Scanner Darkly, Philip K. Dick believed and often wrote about a concept called Anamnesis, a Greek word that means "the loss of forgetfulness". Archer is using D. to forget, his life, his job, his identity, and he succeeds, burning out as many before him(look for the list at the credits), he does remember a blue flower. On one level of plot this may crack the drug racket, which is being run by the re-hab center (the way Philip Morris sponsors anti-cigarette Truth commercials, as free advertising), but just as Substance D. is the symbol of death, the blue flower too has its own symbol, so say the Gods of wikipedia.Though it's themes are somber, it's tone is peppered with surreal humor, Woody Harrelson momentarily transforming into a cock-roach, Robert Downey Jr's security system, and the highlight, Freck's suicide, where an inter-dimensional being appears by his bedside to read him his sins, which will last of eternity. A Scanner Darkly is a tragedy of lost friendship and brain cells, it was based on a time the author himself was living with several young people, after leaving his family and between books, he wrote this after leaving rehab(James Frey eat your heart out), and channeled expertly by Richard Linklater whose talent for coaxing spirited, talk heavy, thoughtful performances and pioneering experimental animation blend perfectly. I had the benefit of seeing this the first time in IMAX, an experience I hope I remember to not forget.

Nonsensical Approach to Reality..... Or, Why Drugs Are Bad...

tt0405296

A Scanner Darkly is the latest of Philip K. Dick stories to be created into full feature movies. Based on the idea of a future America overrun by a drug known as Substance D, A Scanner Darkly follows undercover officer Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) in his attempt to track down and locate the dealers of Substance D. Along with his friends James Barris (Robert Downey Jr.), Ernie Luckman (Woody Harrelson), Charles Freck (Rory Chochran), and girlfriend Donna (Winona Ryder), we see the that the world is a much more confusing and scary place then even Arctor first realized.That, or he has really bad taste in friends.The problem with Scanner is almost evident from the beginning. While promising to be a telling of the moral implications of a war on drugs, the effects of drugs on society, and even ones ability to perceive reality, Scanner instead falls into a series of non-intelligent ramblings of addicts covered up in nice looking animation. We hear Bob's thoughts throughout the movie but they only add to the sense that not only does he not know what is going on, but the viewer is left for themselves to figure out the mess that he has found himself in. The occasional discussions he holds with his "supervisor", who is also disguised in the same shift changing suite that Bob must wear and thus making it impossible for him to know who he is dealing with as well, thankfully add more to the movie. The rare doctor's appointments Bob must also undergo add more to the idea that something is wrong with Bob and society, but again without telling too much through the typical medical babble that doctors are already famous for.The question that I couldn't escape was really what was the point of all of this. There are hints that Bob has more of a past that he cannot remember though we never learn what this past actually was and how it lead him to take the life he ended up with. Bob simply bounces around from place to place listening to the madness around him and soaking it up without any real attempt to solve it or do something about the drug that is consuming himself. In this he becomes a pawn in a greater game though he remains an uninteresting pawn nonetheless.We later learn that Donna herself if Bob's supervisor who is part of a greater plan to have addicted to Substance D so that he could be planted into the rehabilitation centers run by the mysterious New Path Corporation who is actually creating the drug itself. This is a typical twist in a Dick story, but it seems unconvincing and even dull. The acting was strong as was the writing itself but in the end both failed to produce an entertaining and truly thought provoking movie.5/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-176

ur4119148

title: Nonsensical Approach to Reality..... Or, Why Drugs Are Bad... review: A Scanner Darkly is the latest of Philip K. Dick stories to be created into full feature movies. Based on the idea of a future America overrun by a drug known as Substance D, A Scanner Darkly follows undercover officer Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) in his attempt to track down and locate the dealers of Substance D. Along with his friends James Barris (Robert Downey Jr.), Ernie Luckman (Woody Harrelson), Charles Freck (Rory Chochran), and girlfriend Donna (Winona Ryder), we see the that the world is a much more confusing and scary place then even Arctor first realized.That, or he has really bad taste in friends.The problem with Scanner is almost evident from the beginning. While promising to be a telling of the moral implications of a war on drugs, the effects of drugs on society, and even ones ability to perceive reality, Scanner instead falls into a series of non-intelligent ramblings of addicts covered up in nice looking animation. We hear Bob's thoughts throughout the movie but they only add to the sense that not only does he not know what is going on, but the viewer is left for themselves to figure out the mess that he has found himself in. The occasional discussions he holds with his "supervisor", who is also disguised in the same shift changing suite that Bob must wear and thus making it impossible for him to know who he is dealing with as well, thankfully add more to the movie. The rare doctor's appointments Bob must also undergo add more to the idea that something is wrong with Bob and society, but again without telling too much through the typical medical babble that doctors are already famous for.The question that I couldn't escape was really what was the point of all of this. There are hints that Bob has more of a past that he cannot remember though we never learn what this past actually was and how it lead him to take the life he ended up with. Bob simply bounces around from place to place listening to the madness around him and soaking it up without any real attempt to solve it or do something about the drug that is consuming himself. In this he becomes a pawn in a greater game though he remains an uninteresting pawn nonetheless.We later learn that Donna herself if Bob's supervisor who is part of a greater plan to have addicted to Substance D so that he could be planted into the rehabilitation centers run by the mysterious New Path Corporation who is actually creating the drug itself. This is a typical twist in a Dick story, but it seems unconvincing and even dull. The acting was strong as was the writing itself but in the end both failed to produce an entertaining and truly thought provoking movie.5/10

A great animated film, very underrated

tt0405296

As a Philip K. Dick fan, nay, a Philip K. Dick worshiper, of course I make it a point to see every movie based on his work. Some have been better than others, but they've all been enjoyable at the very least. But finally after all these years, we have a movie that feels like a Philip K. Dick novel rather than one merely based off his ideas. Because while A Scanner Darkly was a novel about paranoia and drug-induced schizophrenia and Dick's favorite "what is reality?" theme, it was also a quirky, slice of life dramedy about a small circle of drug using friends. Linklater's movie captures all these facets in perfect balance.The acting is competent across the board, but special attention needs to be paid to Robert Downey Jr.'s brilliant performance as Jim Barris. Every time he's on screen he steals the scene rather easily with his hyperactive ranting, twittering behavior and self-assured attitude. Robert Downey Jr. can play a great druggie, go figure! On the roto-scoped animation, I thought it added nicely to the cognitive dissonance, and it isn't used in a flashy manner, rather to useful but restrained effect, like when the background ever so slightly wobbles and morphs. Although for curiosity's sake I would've loved to have seen what the movie would've looked like without the paint.In the end I would have loved this movie without the PKD involvement, but I also realize that a movie about drug culture, paranoia and the nature of reality are topics near and dear to me, whereas a lot of people I'm sure will find A Scanner Darkly weird and incomprehensible.9.5/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-296

ur13538926

title: A great animated film, very underrated review: As a Philip K. Dick fan, nay, a Philip K. Dick worshiper, of course I make it a point to see every movie based on his work. Some have been better than others, but they've all been enjoyable at the very least. But finally after all these years, we have a movie that feels like a Philip K. Dick novel rather than one merely based off his ideas. Because while A Scanner Darkly was a novel about paranoia and drug-induced schizophrenia and Dick's favorite "what is reality?" theme, it was also a quirky, slice of life dramedy about a small circle of drug using friends. Linklater's movie captures all these facets in perfect balance.The acting is competent across the board, but special attention needs to be paid to Robert Downey Jr.'s brilliant performance as Jim Barris. Every time he's on screen he steals the scene rather easily with his hyperactive ranting, twittering behavior and self-assured attitude. Robert Downey Jr. can play a great druggie, go figure! On the roto-scoped animation, I thought it added nicely to the cognitive dissonance, and it isn't used in a flashy manner, rather to useful but restrained effect, like when the background ever so slightly wobbles and morphs. Although for curiosity's sake I would've loved to have seen what the movie would've looked like without the paint.In the end I would have loved this movie without the PKD involvement, but I also realize that a movie about drug culture, paranoia and the nature of reality are topics near and dear to me, whereas a lot of people I'm sure will find A Scanner Darkly weird and incomprehensible.9.5/10

Paranoid Drugs Sci-Fi

tt0405296

A Scanner Darkly is an excellent adaption of the Philip K. Dick novel, looking at the wars of Drugs, drug cultures, dystopia and ideas of reality and the mind. It is an animated film, but done is a unusual style, where the characters looks like the actors they are based on.A Scanner Darkly is set seven years in the future, and America is suffering a drugs empedemic. As well as the traditional narcotics they is a new powerful drug, Substances D which rots away at a person's brain. The focus of the films is on Bob Arctor aka 'Fred' (Keanu Reeves), an undercover drugs officer in Orange County, California, who tries to infuliate a group of drug users lead by Jim Farris (Robert Downey Jr. (oh the irony)). Bob tries to find the source of Substance D, using a drug dealer and cocaine user Donna (Winona Ryder), with the hope of demanding so much from her that she would be focused tell him to go to her supplier. Within the police Bob is known as 'Fred' and all officers wear a special scammer suits which means no officer knows the other's true identity. 'Fred' boss 'Hank' believes that Bob Arctor is the leader of the drug and planning a number of illegal activities. This even gets Bob to question himself. Whilst in the group of users Bob starts taking Subtances B, and starts to mess with his brain. As the film progresses Bob starts to get more paranoid, his memory is messed up, he cognitive abilities become shot, becomes depress and miss sees objects. This affects his work for the police and relationships within the group. He slowly not even functioning as human being and looses his sense of identity.To tackle loosing in the war on drugs the US government and the police have turned America into a surveillence society where camera are everywhere, a lot of police on the ground, telephone calls being monitored and arrests being ordered immediately. People get monitored in a number of ways and as you can imagine this doesn't help with people suffering from paranoid.A Scanner Darkly is a deeply personal novel to Philip K. Dick, who was a paranoid drug user himself. This film was a reflection on. The director and writer of the film was Richard Linklater, who previously directed School of Rock (a film I found overrated (but had good music)). He used his knowledge of slacker and drug culture in this and Linklater is a fan of Dick's work, which shows in the film. He made you feel the suspense and the paranoia in film and he keeps the audience guessing. The animation, as I have mention was usual. It had a very realist view on thinks and the drawing of the characters looked like the actors who were playing them. It was done with a lot of love and talent. They is a lot of detail and you see the emotions in the characters faces. The style is similar to that used in the Isreali film Waltz with Bashir. The acting is also top notching and the casting was very good. Keanu Reeves has given his best performance since the first Matrix film. Robert Downey Jr. was perfectly casted as Farris, the sleazy drug user (a character he properly used to be) and self-made chemist. Winona Ryder is good as always and this was her first film since her shop-lifting incident. Woody Harrelson and Rory Cochrane also offer good supporting roles.A Scanner Darkly is very dark, surreal and complex, and they are all good things. It may be a little hard to follow at times, but it keeps you focus and keeps you guessing. I like complex films, I like films that have issues, and this film has it in barrel fulls. It is also in a tight little packer, just over an hour and half, similar to recent efforts by David Cronenburg. In this film I can see influences of books and films such as 1984, A Clockwork Orange, Trainspotting and Requiem for a Dream, an unusual mix but it works. In previous Dick adaptations, directors like Ridley Scott, Steven Spielburg and Paul Verhoeven had grand images of the future. Linklater's view was more down to earth, more realistic and gritty. I think because of the subject matter it is more fitting and works, compared to Paycheck, directed by John Woo. Because of the film's use of animation it made surreal scene work really well. Finally this film is also at times funny. Most of the jokes are dark, and the best one involves suicide and masturbation (I'll leave it at that).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-275

ur17571044

title: Paranoid Drugs Sci-Fi review: A Scanner Darkly is an excellent adaption of the Philip K. Dick novel, looking at the wars of Drugs, drug cultures, dystopia and ideas of reality and the mind. It is an animated film, but done is a unusual style, where the characters looks like the actors they are based on.A Scanner Darkly is set seven years in the future, and America is suffering a drugs empedemic. As well as the traditional narcotics they is a new powerful drug, Substances D which rots away at a person's brain. The focus of the films is on Bob Arctor aka 'Fred' (Keanu Reeves), an undercover drugs officer in Orange County, California, who tries to infuliate a group of drug users lead by Jim Farris (Robert Downey Jr. (oh the irony)). Bob tries to find the source of Substance D, using a drug dealer and cocaine user Donna (Winona Ryder), with the hope of demanding so much from her that she would be focused tell him to go to her supplier. Within the police Bob is known as 'Fred' and all officers wear a special scammer suits which means no officer knows the other's true identity. 'Fred' boss 'Hank' believes that Bob Arctor is the leader of the drug and planning a number of illegal activities. This even gets Bob to question himself. Whilst in the group of users Bob starts taking Subtances B, and starts to mess with his brain. As the film progresses Bob starts to get more paranoid, his memory is messed up, he cognitive abilities become shot, becomes depress and miss sees objects. This affects his work for the police and relationships within the group. He slowly not even functioning as human being and looses his sense of identity.To tackle loosing in the war on drugs the US government and the police have turned America into a surveillence society where camera are everywhere, a lot of police on the ground, telephone calls being monitored and arrests being ordered immediately. People get monitored in a number of ways and as you can imagine this doesn't help with people suffering from paranoid.A Scanner Darkly is a deeply personal novel to Philip K. Dick, who was a paranoid drug user himself. This film was a reflection on. The director and writer of the film was Richard Linklater, who previously directed School of Rock (a film I found overrated (but had good music)). He used his knowledge of slacker and drug culture in this and Linklater is a fan of Dick's work, which shows in the film. He made you feel the suspense and the paranoia in film and he keeps the audience guessing. The animation, as I have mention was usual. It had a very realist view on thinks and the drawing of the characters looked like the actors who were playing them. It was done with a lot of love and talent. They is a lot of detail and you see the emotions in the characters faces. The style is similar to that used in the Isreali film Waltz with Bashir. The acting is also top notching and the casting was very good. Keanu Reeves has given his best performance since the first Matrix film. Robert Downey Jr. was perfectly casted as Farris, the sleazy drug user (a character he properly used to be) and self-made chemist. Winona Ryder is good as always and this was her first film since her shop-lifting incident. Woody Harrelson and Rory Cochrane also offer good supporting roles.A Scanner Darkly is very dark, surreal and complex, and they are all good things. It may be a little hard to follow at times, but it keeps you focus and keeps you guessing. I like complex films, I like films that have issues, and this film has it in barrel fulls. It is also in a tight little packer, just over an hour and half, similar to recent efforts by David Cronenburg. In this film I can see influences of books and films such as 1984, A Clockwork Orange, Trainspotting and Requiem for a Dream, an unusual mix but it works. In previous Dick adaptations, directors like Ridley Scott, Steven Spielburg and Paul Verhoeven had grand images of the future. Linklater's view was more down to earth, more realistic and gritty. I think because of the subject matter it is more fitting and works, compared to Paycheck, directed by John Woo. Because of the film's use of animation it made surreal scene work really well. Finally this film is also at times funny. Most of the jokes are dark, and the best one involves suicide and masturbation (I'll leave it at that).

A clever, cinematic mind trip, destined to become a cult classic

tt0405296

A Scanner DarklyAfter so many film incarnations of Philip K. Dick's futuristic sci-fi thrillers being turned into very Hollywood, if still entertaining outings (Minority Report, Blade Runner and the less than satisfying Paycheck) it's nice to see one which remains very true, to the trippy, paranoid and drug addled tone of Dick's story. Indeed, A Scanner Darkly is one of the most unique and clever films you're likely to see in cinemas anytime soon, and not just due to the wonderful animation technique, which very much adds to the imbalanced, trippy tone of the story, but just due to its clarity and originality of vision. Without giving anything away, there is a fair amount of thought required to keep pace with the story and enjoy all of the clever little touches on display, and the ending should prove to be an "of course!" surprise for even the most intelligent, wary viewers.The plot manages to serve as a warning against the increasingly tight world of communication, with the characters' paranoid lifestyle, their every action being recorded, as well as make several valid points regarding the drug world and how it is perceived and dealt with through the media and systems of government. But Scanner does not become a blatant satire nor philosophical rant in any way, and instead makes its points in a very subtle, underhanded fashion, which may take an extra viewing or two to fully take in and capture the nuances of. Director Richard Linklater deserves quite a bit of credit with this latest addition to his increasingly eclectic resumé, for having handled the material in a very intelligent, thoughtful and entertaining fashion, not to mention his choice of rotoscoping "animation over live action" visuals, which is a truly unique and inspired touch, much in the style of his 2001 indie hit "Waking Life", which used a similar visual medium. The excellent cast brings Linklater's quirky creative vision to life in an inspired fashion by perfectly matching the slightly off tone of the film. Even Keanu Reeves, who I would normally bash for being the worst part of the movie and for showing one facial expression and tone of voice throughout doesn't seem entirely out of place, though said criticisms still ring true - one just doesn't seem to mind so much, the tone of the film is so consistently odd that Keanu seems a perfect fit, lack of emotion or not. However it's in the supporting cast that most of the joy is truly found, especially in the back and forth drug addled banter between Robert Downey Jr. who easily walks away with the film as a fast talking, paranoid and deceptive addict, and Woody Harrelson also a treat to watch as a fellow addict who frequently erupts with fits of incredible energy, usually for no discernible reason. Winona Ryder also makes a great comeback as Donna Murphy, the dealer and girlfriend to Reeve's undercover cop who becomes an addict. Rory Cochrane also gives a great performance as a twitchy and increasingly paranoid addict, who experiences a hallucination scene which is both hilarious and slightly creepy all in one. All in all, A Scanner Darkly is certainly worth viewing, if only to provoke thought and for its incredibly originality compared to most of the formulaic and predictable movies theaters are cluttered with these days. Be warned: expect to have to think, expect to be confused for certain periods, perhaps quite frequently, and the movie may take another viewing to fully appreciate its message and all the nuances one might miss trying to keep pace with the plot. But Scanner is a very dark, intelligent, quirky and original film, and one that deserves to be viewed by all who enjoy such qualities in a movie in an age where they are seldom found.-8/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-113

ur3728510

title: A clever, cinematic mind trip, destined to become a cult classic review: A Scanner DarklyAfter so many film incarnations of Philip K. Dick's futuristic sci-fi thrillers being turned into very Hollywood, if still entertaining outings (Minority Report, Blade Runner and the less than satisfying Paycheck) it's nice to see one which remains very true, to the trippy, paranoid and drug addled tone of Dick's story. Indeed, A Scanner Darkly is one of the most unique and clever films you're likely to see in cinemas anytime soon, and not just due to the wonderful animation technique, which very much adds to the imbalanced, trippy tone of the story, but just due to its clarity and originality of vision. Without giving anything away, there is a fair amount of thought required to keep pace with the story and enjoy all of the clever little touches on display, and the ending should prove to be an "of course!" surprise for even the most intelligent, wary viewers.The plot manages to serve as a warning against the increasingly tight world of communication, with the characters' paranoid lifestyle, their every action being recorded, as well as make several valid points regarding the drug world and how it is perceived and dealt with through the media and systems of government. But Scanner does not become a blatant satire nor philosophical rant in any way, and instead makes its points in a very subtle, underhanded fashion, which may take an extra viewing or two to fully take in and capture the nuances of. Director Richard Linklater deserves quite a bit of credit with this latest addition to his increasingly eclectic resumé, for having handled the material in a very intelligent, thoughtful and entertaining fashion, not to mention his choice of rotoscoping "animation over live action" visuals, which is a truly unique and inspired touch, much in the style of his 2001 indie hit "Waking Life", which used a similar visual medium. The excellent cast brings Linklater's quirky creative vision to life in an inspired fashion by perfectly matching the slightly off tone of the film. Even Keanu Reeves, who I would normally bash for being the worst part of the movie and for showing one facial expression and tone of voice throughout doesn't seem entirely out of place, though said criticisms still ring true - one just doesn't seem to mind so much, the tone of the film is so consistently odd that Keanu seems a perfect fit, lack of emotion or not. However it's in the supporting cast that most of the joy is truly found, especially in the back and forth drug addled banter between Robert Downey Jr. who easily walks away with the film as a fast talking, paranoid and deceptive addict, and Woody Harrelson also a treat to watch as a fellow addict who frequently erupts with fits of incredible energy, usually for no discernible reason. Winona Ryder also makes a great comeback as Donna Murphy, the dealer and girlfriend to Reeve's undercover cop who becomes an addict. Rory Cochrane also gives a great performance as a twitchy and increasingly paranoid addict, who experiences a hallucination scene which is both hilarious and slightly creepy all in one. All in all, A Scanner Darkly is certainly worth viewing, if only to provoke thought and for its incredibly originality compared to most of the formulaic and predictable movies theaters are cluttered with these days. Be warned: expect to have to think, expect to be confused for certain periods, perhaps quite frequently, and the movie may take another viewing to fully appreciate its message and all the nuances one might miss trying to keep pace with the plot. But Scanner is a very dark, intelligent, quirky and original film, and one that deserves to be viewed by all who enjoy such qualities in a movie in an age where they are seldom found.-8/10

I saw death rising from the ground

tt0405296

What if the government turned one of its own into that which it serves to rid society of? If it enlisted anonymous employees for a mission, while necessary, that called for them to turn their recruit into an addict? The only way to infiltrate an illegal operation is to send one of its own inside. One sacrifice needs to see darkly in order for humanity to one day be able to see clearly again. A Scanner Darkly is a dark and personal descent into hell. Set in a not-so- distant future, our players are constantly under surveillance in order to capture those who are corrupting the world with the drug Substance D. We are thrown into the underground to see first hand the destruction of humanity, one delusion at a time. Science fiction has never been better and a story by Philip K. Dick never adapted so intelligently.I have seen many Dick adaptations to film over the years, the favorite being Ridley Scott's artistic and intelligent Blade Runner. Not until now, however, have I really wanted to go straight to the bookstore to pick up his entire catalog of novels. Never having read his stories I wasn't sure what his tone really was. Minority Report was a good film until the tacked on sappy ending that only Spielberg can do, and Paycheck was a dismal waste of time. But then you have the dark despair of Blade Runner and the corruption of Total Recall, two movies which succeed greatly in my mind. After watching Richard Linklater's adaptation of Darkly, I have to believe the heavy, cynical outlook on life is what Dick does and have to wonder whether the two failures changed his stories to go mainstream (which wouldn't surprise me in the least). His works need independent visionaries like Scott and Linklater to say screw the mainstream, we need this story to go out right.We are introduced to Keanu Reeves character, after the credit sequence, and learn that he is a government agent working to stop the distribution of Substance D. Like the others in his job, he must wear a scramble suit to conceal his identity on the job. This suit makes it impossible to know who the agent really is. When off the clock, they actually are junkies themselves, infiltrated into the culture to play the addicts off each other and get a big arrest. Reeves is perfectly cast as a man of principles who has slowly gone off the deep end into psychosis. He recalls to himself the wife and children at home, while at the moment he is a low-life named Bob Arctor, living with his user friends/suspects. Only Keanu can pull off the heady aloofness needed when he is assigned by his boss to watch Arctor, (yes, himself), to see if he slips and can be arrested. His employers know he must be in that circle of people, but there is no way of knowing which one he is, making this seemingly ludicrous assignment possible.While Keanu's split personalities drive the plot, his friends make the ride enjoyable. Robert Downey Jr., Woody Harrelson, and Rory Cochrane are hilarious. The three are in a permanent state of delusion, leading to paranoid inferences and activities. No one besides Downey Jr. can stop on dime and go off into tangents and unintelligible brainstorms when provoked by his own thoughts. The rapport between this crew is amazing and they play off each other brilliantly. Even Winona Ryder does an admirable job as Arctor's girl/dealer Donna. She plays a junkie on D, but with a heart. Her character allows us to see deep into Reeves' character emotionally. A side effect of D for females is the shutdown of the sexdrive; the utter disgust at being touched affectionately. We are shown the feelings that Donna and Arctor have for each other that can never be fulfilled. Hopefully her shoplifting hiatus has come to a close and Ryder follows this comeback with more roles in the future.The story runs at an exciting pace, keeping you on the edge of your seat to continue through and find out Bob Arctor's fate. Will he be arrested although he is taking surveillance of himself? or will he be able to find a bigger fish to fry while making his cover and descent to hell mean something? The layers Linklater has sewn together here are all superimposed on each other to great effect. The language has many quotable passages that you can almost feel are Dick's words, and for this I commend Linklater for the courage to stick to the real heart of the story. I almost don't have to mention the rotoscoping effect used, similar to the director's previous gem Waking Life. Without the freedom animation allows, the movie could not have been as successful as it is. I applaud all involved as this journey continues with its laughs and tears all culminating in the heartbreaking finale, that when looking back really is the only way it could have played out. Also, it was a very nice touch, before the credits, having Philip K. Dick's memoriam for all his friends that had died or suffered immensely from the effects of drugs. A Scanner Darkly tries to give meaning to their descent and a glimmer of hope for the future to one day rid itself of the voluntary plague.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-70

ur2020154

title: I saw death rising from the ground review: What if the government turned one of its own into that which it serves to rid society of? If it enlisted anonymous employees for a mission, while necessary, that called for them to turn their recruit into an addict? The only way to infiltrate an illegal operation is to send one of its own inside. One sacrifice needs to see darkly in order for humanity to one day be able to see clearly again. A Scanner Darkly is a dark and personal descent into hell. Set in a not-so- distant future, our players are constantly under surveillance in order to capture those who are corrupting the world with the drug Substance D. We are thrown into the underground to see first hand the destruction of humanity, one delusion at a time. Science fiction has never been better and a story by Philip K. Dick never adapted so intelligently.I have seen many Dick adaptations to film over the years, the favorite being Ridley Scott's artistic and intelligent Blade Runner. Not until now, however, have I really wanted to go straight to the bookstore to pick up his entire catalog of novels. Never having read his stories I wasn't sure what his tone really was. Minority Report was a good film until the tacked on sappy ending that only Spielberg can do, and Paycheck was a dismal waste of time. But then you have the dark despair of Blade Runner and the corruption of Total Recall, two movies which succeed greatly in my mind. After watching Richard Linklater's adaptation of Darkly, I have to believe the heavy, cynical outlook on life is what Dick does and have to wonder whether the two failures changed his stories to go mainstream (which wouldn't surprise me in the least). His works need independent visionaries like Scott and Linklater to say screw the mainstream, we need this story to go out right.We are introduced to Keanu Reeves character, after the credit sequence, and learn that he is a government agent working to stop the distribution of Substance D. Like the others in his job, he must wear a scramble suit to conceal his identity on the job. This suit makes it impossible to know who the agent really is. When off the clock, they actually are junkies themselves, infiltrated into the culture to play the addicts off each other and get a big arrest. Reeves is perfectly cast as a man of principles who has slowly gone off the deep end into psychosis. He recalls to himself the wife and children at home, while at the moment he is a low-life named Bob Arctor, living with his user friends/suspects. Only Keanu can pull off the heady aloofness needed when he is assigned by his boss to watch Arctor, (yes, himself), to see if he slips and can be arrested. His employers know he must be in that circle of people, but there is no way of knowing which one he is, making this seemingly ludicrous assignment possible.While Keanu's split personalities drive the plot, his friends make the ride enjoyable. Robert Downey Jr., Woody Harrelson, and Rory Cochrane are hilarious. The three are in a permanent state of delusion, leading to paranoid inferences and activities. No one besides Downey Jr. can stop on dime and go off into tangents and unintelligible brainstorms when provoked by his own thoughts. The rapport between this crew is amazing and they play off each other brilliantly. Even Winona Ryder does an admirable job as Arctor's girl/dealer Donna. She plays a junkie on D, but with a heart. Her character allows us to see deep into Reeves' character emotionally. A side effect of D for females is the shutdown of the sexdrive; the utter disgust at being touched affectionately. We are shown the feelings that Donna and Arctor have for each other that can never be fulfilled. Hopefully her shoplifting hiatus has come to a close and Ryder follows this comeback with more roles in the future.The story runs at an exciting pace, keeping you on the edge of your seat to continue through and find out Bob Arctor's fate. Will he be arrested although he is taking surveillance of himself? or will he be able to find a bigger fish to fry while making his cover and descent to hell mean something? The layers Linklater has sewn together here are all superimposed on each other to great effect. The language has many quotable passages that you can almost feel are Dick's words, and for this I commend Linklater for the courage to stick to the real heart of the story. I almost don't have to mention the rotoscoping effect used, similar to the director's previous gem Waking Life. Without the freedom animation allows, the movie could not have been as successful as it is. I applaud all involved as this journey continues with its laughs and tears all culminating in the heartbreaking finale, that when looking back really is the only way it could have played out. Also, it was a very nice touch, before the credits, having Philip K. Dick's memoriam for all his friends that had died or suffered immensely from the effects of drugs. A Scanner Darkly tries to give meaning to their descent and a glimmer of hope for the future to one day rid itself of the voluntary plague.

An odd and surprisingly depressing film.

tt0405296

Stars: Keanu Reeves, Robert Downey Jr., Wynona Ryder, Woody Harrelson and Rory Cochrane.I really didn't know what to expect from this movie, and I have to say, it was just all too stupid. In the film, it seems as though every bit of diologue said just disappears. It's hard to understand the actors quite a lot in this and there is so much meaningless conversation about really dumb things. The movie looks really good with animation over live action, but it's the substance (not the substance abuse) that is lacking. "Scanner" has many twists and turns, and by the end, I was becoming depressed. The plot of this film (at first glance) is 7 years in the future, our lives are being monitored always. There is a drug menace called Drug D, that either you take it and get hooked, or you've never tried it. This movie follows 5 users of the drug, one of which is an undercover cop (Keanu Reeves). I think the film was trying to say how bad the police are, and how drugs ruin lives, but it really wasn't a pleasant experience watching this bizarre and often times confusing film. As for the acting, I thought it was all very good, and often purposely over the top. I didn't like Woody Harrelson's character, but I sort of found the others amusing. Rory Cochrane was really good and kind of funny as the extreme addict seeing bugs everywhere and always twitching. I think that Scanner's main problem was it felt disjointed and it didn't really explain itself until the end, so for the whole film you just want to know what is going on. This film will without a doubt reach a cult status, but never any more.My rating: ** out of ****. 97 mins. Rated R for Language, Nonstop drug abuse, Some Nudity and A Violent Scene.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-53

ur4195782

title: An odd and surprisingly depressing film. review: Stars: Keanu Reeves, Robert Downey Jr., Wynona Ryder, Woody Harrelson and Rory Cochrane.I really didn't know what to expect from this movie, and I have to say, it was just all too stupid. In the film, it seems as though every bit of diologue said just disappears. It's hard to understand the actors quite a lot in this and there is so much meaningless conversation about really dumb things. The movie looks really good with animation over live action, but it's the substance (not the substance abuse) that is lacking. "Scanner" has many twists and turns, and by the end, I was becoming depressed. The plot of this film (at first glance) is 7 years in the future, our lives are being monitored always. There is a drug menace called Drug D, that either you take it and get hooked, or you've never tried it. This movie follows 5 users of the drug, one of which is an undercover cop (Keanu Reeves). I think the film was trying to say how bad the police are, and how drugs ruin lives, but it really wasn't a pleasant experience watching this bizarre and often times confusing film. As for the acting, I thought it was all very good, and often purposely over the top. I didn't like Woody Harrelson's character, but I sort of found the others amusing. Rory Cochrane was really good and kind of funny as the extreme addict seeing bugs everywhere and always twitching. I think that Scanner's main problem was it felt disjointed and it didn't really explain itself until the end, so for the whole film you just want to know what is going on. This film will without a doubt reach a cult status, but never any more.My rating: ** out of ****. 97 mins. Rated R for Language, Nonstop drug abuse, Some Nudity and A Violent Scene.

Undoubtedly destined for cult status...

tt0405296

...Richard "Fast Food Nation" Linklater's adaptation of Philip K. Dick's classic sf allegory is not only as true to the source material as one could ask, it sports an hallucinatory visual style that meshes perfectly with the story. I missed it on the big screen, much to my retro-spectacled chagrin, but even on DVD the marriage of form to content is striking and impressive. Paranoia and deceit are rendered palpable in this dark but scathingly humorous portrait of the drug culture gone mainstream.The casting is near-perfect: Keanu "Dude!" Reeves as an increasingly schizophrenic undercover cop instructed to spy on himself, Robert "I'm clean, I swear!" Downey, Jr. as the Trojan horse (or is he?), Rory "Hart's War" Cochrane updating his "Dazed and Confused" persona, Woody "I'm clean, too, I swear!" Harrelson rounding out the trio of stooges that Reeves' character hangs with, and Winona "I paid for that!" Ryder as the main squeeze (and something else altogether). Linklater handles this ensemble with surety and finesse, extracting maximum effect.Mainstream movie buffs will most likely not care for "A Scanner Darkly," but more's the loss for them. Linklater has created another gem to add to his growing body of work, and though this one may best be viewed from the sympathetic perspective of those who have been through the agonies of drug addiction, the message invoked transcends its sordid origins, and has a most timely relevance in today's world of heightened security, eroding individual rights, and terror-fueled discomfiture.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-247

ur0431565

title: Undoubtedly destined for cult status... review: ...Richard "Fast Food Nation" Linklater's adaptation of Philip K. Dick's classic sf allegory is not only as true to the source material as one could ask, it sports an hallucinatory visual style that meshes perfectly with the story. I missed it on the big screen, much to my retro-spectacled chagrin, but even on DVD the marriage of form to content is striking and impressive. Paranoia and deceit are rendered palpable in this dark but scathingly humorous portrait of the drug culture gone mainstream.The casting is near-perfect: Keanu "Dude!" Reeves as an increasingly schizophrenic undercover cop instructed to spy on himself, Robert "I'm clean, I swear!" Downey, Jr. as the Trojan horse (or is he?), Rory "Hart's War" Cochrane updating his "Dazed and Confused" persona, Woody "I'm clean, too, I swear!" Harrelson rounding out the trio of stooges that Reeves' character hangs with, and Winona "I paid for that!" Ryder as the main squeeze (and something else altogether). Linklater handles this ensemble with surety and finesse, extracting maximum effect.Mainstream movie buffs will most likely not care for "A Scanner Darkly," but more's the loss for them. Linklater has created another gem to add to his growing body of work, and though this one may best be viewed from the sympathetic perspective of those who have been through the agonies of drug addiction, the message invoked transcends its sordid origins, and has a most timely relevance in today's world of heightened security, eroding individual rights, and terror-fueled discomfiture.

Junkie Junk

tt0405296

Richard Linklater's transfer of Phillip Dick's amphetamine-induced confusion. Like Linklater's "Waking Life," this bears an uncomfortable resemblance to the stoned ramblings of freshmen staying up all night smoking dope. No surprise that it goes nowhere. Just as in "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang," crazed droogie Robert Downey Jr. can again be counted on for a diarrhea of words. Keanu Reeves, professional space head, is the perfect vehicle for emptiness.In sum: the meaninglessness of people with no object in life other than taking drugs. If they die young, who cares? That Hollywood has nothing better to do than spend countless thousands of dollars and hours in laboriously recreating reality in highly technical, computer animation only reiterates the emptiness, like an echo in a cave.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-49

ur0542841

title: Junkie Junk review: Richard Linklater's transfer of Phillip Dick's amphetamine-induced confusion. Like Linklater's "Waking Life," this bears an uncomfortable resemblance to the stoned ramblings of freshmen staying up all night smoking dope. No surprise that it goes nowhere. Just as in "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang," crazed droogie Robert Downey Jr. can again be counted on for a diarrhea of words. Keanu Reeves, professional space head, is the perfect vehicle for emptiness.In sum: the meaninglessness of people with no object in life other than taking drugs. If they die young, who cares? That Hollywood has nothing better to do than spend countless thousands of dollars and hours in laboriously recreating reality in highly technical, computer animation only reiterates the emptiness, like an echo in a cave.

Interesting for the animation and almost nothing else.

tt0405296

Now, I have no idea how the animation was done in this movie, but the effect is so realistic that I have a feeling that it was filmed live and then an effect was layered onto the footage either while filming or during post production. At any rate, the effect gives the movie and entirely unique look that has never been done before, unfortunately as far as the story, there's just flat out nothing there.Keanu Reeves plays a super-secret agent for the Los Angeles Police Department, so super-secret, in fact, that his superiors don't even realize that they are assigning him to spy on himself. You see, not only does he work for the LAPD, but he is also an unemployed drug addict who associates himself with other addicts such as those played by Woody Harrelson, Winona Ryder, and Robert Downey Jr. Not a very challenging assignment for any of them, they basically play themselves in the movie.In the near future, there is a drug out on the streets called Substance D that is extremely addictive and performs bizarre abuses on the human mind, abuses which would make for some clever animation ideas were it to ever be featured on a half-assed, semi-animated, semi-intoxicated black comedy. I've heard it said that this is destined to become a cult classic. I guess. There are some conversations which are entertaining enough in their marked pointlessness, but a few clever bits of dialogue hidden within a 90 minute, convoluted mess do not a classic make. Not even a cult one.The film is based on the Philip K. Dick novel of the same name, which in turn is based on Dick's personal drug experiences. I can't imagine why you would need any more reason than that not to bother watching it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-213

ur0562732

title: Interesting for the animation and almost nothing else. review: Now, I have no idea how the animation was done in this movie, but the effect is so realistic that I have a feeling that it was filmed live and then an effect was layered onto the footage either while filming or during post production. At any rate, the effect gives the movie and entirely unique look that has never been done before, unfortunately as far as the story, there's just flat out nothing there.Keanu Reeves plays a super-secret agent for the Los Angeles Police Department, so super-secret, in fact, that his superiors don't even realize that they are assigning him to spy on himself. You see, not only does he work for the LAPD, but he is also an unemployed drug addict who associates himself with other addicts such as those played by Woody Harrelson, Winona Ryder, and Robert Downey Jr. Not a very challenging assignment for any of them, they basically play themselves in the movie.In the near future, there is a drug out on the streets called Substance D that is extremely addictive and performs bizarre abuses on the human mind, abuses which would make for some clever animation ideas were it to ever be featured on a half-assed, semi-animated, semi-intoxicated black comedy. I've heard it said that this is destined to become a cult classic. I guess. There are some conversations which are entertaining enough in their marked pointlessness, but a few clever bits of dialogue hidden within a 90 minute, convoluted mess do not a classic make. Not even a cult one.The film is based on the Philip K. Dick novel of the same name, which in turn is based on Dick's personal drug experiences. I can't imagine why you would need any more reason than that not to bother watching it.

very weird

tt0405296

i haven't read the book/story this i based on and the film is a bit difficult to follow but still very good. the whole filmed then drawn thing is brilliant. Keanu reeves was pretty good, i loved Winona Ryder.Robert Downey Junior was brilliant as the paranoid doctor. woody Harrelson equally brilliant as the stoner friend.this is a society blighted by super addictive drugs. that are being created by the company who is trying to "cure" all those taking that drug.this visuals of the film are done in a hand drawn style over the prefilmed content, it gives the film a very unique look that makes recognising some of the actors not an easy thing to do at certain times.all in all, it was a very hard plot to follow but looked great.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-207

ur0727639

title: very weird review: i haven't read the book/story this i based on and the film is a bit difficult to follow but still very good. the whole filmed then drawn thing is brilliant. Keanu reeves was pretty good, i loved Winona Ryder.Robert Downey Junior was brilliant as the paranoid doctor. woody Harrelson equally brilliant as the stoner friend.this is a society blighted by super addictive drugs. that are being created by the company who is trying to "cure" all those taking that drug.this visuals of the film are done in a hand drawn style over the prefilmed content, it gives the film a very unique look that makes recognising some of the actors not an easy thing to do at certain times.all in all, it was a very hard plot to follow but looked great.

Much more than what it seems.

tt0405296

On the surface, A Scanner Darkly is a character study of undercover cop Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) and his interactions with various drug addicts while trying to get to those higher up on the ladder set in the not-so-distant future. It's a highly interesting story that takes a few twists and turns at the end that I truly didn't see coming and was stunned by. An intricate, detailed story of a man who is involved with things that are way above his head. The ending is still absolutely outstanding, in my mind. Richard Linklater's use of rotoscoping is probably the only way that the film could have been made, but it also ends up being it's main flaw for me. Maybe it's in the story itself, but I think it came from the animation; whatever it was the entire film was very empty and distant to me. I didn't have any concern or emotion for the characters and that's something vital to me when it comes to film. Still, it's an insanely compelling story with some highly impressive technical elements and astounding performances. Robert Downey Jr. delivers a flawless portrayal, as always, which is easily one of the best performances of 2006.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-249

ur9521536

title: Much more than what it seems. review: On the surface, A Scanner Darkly is a character study of undercover cop Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) and his interactions with various drug addicts while trying to get to those higher up on the ladder set in the not-so-distant future. It's a highly interesting story that takes a few twists and turns at the end that I truly didn't see coming and was stunned by. An intricate, detailed story of a man who is involved with things that are way above his head. The ending is still absolutely outstanding, in my mind. Richard Linklater's use of rotoscoping is probably the only way that the film could have been made, but it also ends up being it's main flaw for me. Maybe it's in the story itself, but I think it came from the animation; whatever it was the entire film was very empty and distant to me. I didn't have any concern or emotion for the characters and that's something vital to me when it comes to film. Still, it's an insanely compelling story with some highly impressive technical elements and astounding performances. Robert Downey Jr. delivers a flawless portrayal, as always, which is easily one of the best performances of 2006.

A twist to science fiction films whose innovations trumps confusion

tt0405296

Legendary science-fiction novelist Philip K. Dick could probably never have imagined a film adaptation of one of his novels being rotoscoped, but the medium comes off as a perfect fit for a story all about the destructive, mind-altering nature of hallucinogenic drugs. The entire film is like a trip -- an inspiring technique that rolls over the holes and vagueness of the screenplay to create an entirely unique film experience.A film can be made a certain way for style points or it can be made that way for a content- driven reason. Director/writer Richard Linklater does both in "A Scanner Darkly." Well-known by some for his era comedies "Slackers" and "Dazed and Confused" and by others for his indie romances "Before Sunrise" and "Before Sunset," the science-fiction turn is a gutsy one for Linklater. It certainly pays off in a film that's just as daring. Animation outside the property boundaries of Disney World is often dismissed as hokey, but Linklater uses it intelligently. Instead of merely rotoscoping all the live-action shots, the artists create a rendering that breathes more life into the images. Even if it's just the way the characters' hair changes shades in the light, it's fascinating to watch. Sometimes, admittedly, it distracts from a plot too tough to follow at points. The film walks that line finely, but when it adds to the film it really does make an impact.Starring an interesting trio of Keanu Reeves, Robert Downey Jr., and Winona Ryder, "A Scanner Darkly" is the story of a not-so-distant future where an epidemic of addiction to a "Substance D" is tearing apart the country. Bob Arctor (Reeves) is an under-cover narcotics officer (he wears a suit concealing his identity to even his co-workers, or most of them) assigned to bust a ring which he soon discovers he is intimately tied to and identified as a possible dealer. When his friend James (Downey Jr.) comes to the police trying to incriminate him, Arctor is forced to study himself essentially, a stress that leads to his own excessive use of Substance D and causes him to plunge toward depression.It's not a surprise that the story was essentially composed based on Dick's own experience with drugs. The idea of the scanner darkly is a deeply introspective one. For those who can connect to the struggle between drug use and identity, this might be the most powerful look at it that one can get. In a way this sort of justifies how confusing the film can be.Others who will like the film are Quentin Tarantino fans. The earlier portions of this film represent his stream of consciousness dialog and the drugged-out characters (one being Woody Harrelson even) contribute to this idea. Guys such as Harrelson and Downey Jr. are perfect in their roles as a result. Reeves is good because once again his character is actually supposed to be stoic and confused all the time. The typecast is a slap in the face, but at least Reeves and his agent clearly know this is the only type of role he can do well.The best way to sum up "Darkly" is to call it a combination of classic literary science-fiction, Hunter S. Thompson and "Pulp Fiction." It's bizarre, humorous in a dark way and ultimately eye-opening.~Steven CVisit my site http://moviemusereviews.com

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-284

ur2496397

title: A twist to science fiction films whose innovations trumps confusion review: Legendary science-fiction novelist Philip K. Dick could probably never have imagined a film adaptation of one of his novels being rotoscoped, but the medium comes off as a perfect fit for a story all about the destructive, mind-altering nature of hallucinogenic drugs. The entire film is like a trip -- an inspiring technique that rolls over the holes and vagueness of the screenplay to create an entirely unique film experience.A film can be made a certain way for style points or it can be made that way for a content- driven reason. Director/writer Richard Linklater does both in "A Scanner Darkly." Well-known by some for his era comedies "Slackers" and "Dazed and Confused" and by others for his indie romances "Before Sunrise" and "Before Sunset," the science-fiction turn is a gutsy one for Linklater. It certainly pays off in a film that's just as daring. Animation outside the property boundaries of Disney World is often dismissed as hokey, but Linklater uses it intelligently. Instead of merely rotoscoping all the live-action shots, the artists create a rendering that breathes more life into the images. Even if it's just the way the characters' hair changes shades in the light, it's fascinating to watch. Sometimes, admittedly, it distracts from a plot too tough to follow at points. The film walks that line finely, but when it adds to the film it really does make an impact.Starring an interesting trio of Keanu Reeves, Robert Downey Jr., and Winona Ryder, "A Scanner Darkly" is the story of a not-so-distant future where an epidemic of addiction to a "Substance D" is tearing apart the country. Bob Arctor (Reeves) is an under-cover narcotics officer (he wears a suit concealing his identity to even his co-workers, or most of them) assigned to bust a ring which he soon discovers he is intimately tied to and identified as a possible dealer. When his friend James (Downey Jr.) comes to the police trying to incriminate him, Arctor is forced to study himself essentially, a stress that leads to his own excessive use of Substance D and causes him to plunge toward depression.It's not a surprise that the story was essentially composed based on Dick's own experience with drugs. The idea of the scanner darkly is a deeply introspective one. For those who can connect to the struggle between drug use and identity, this might be the most powerful look at it that one can get. In a way this sort of justifies how confusing the film can be.Others who will like the film are Quentin Tarantino fans. The earlier portions of this film represent his stream of consciousness dialog and the drugged-out characters (one being Woody Harrelson even) contribute to this idea. Guys such as Harrelson and Downey Jr. are perfect in their roles as a result. Reeves is good because once again his character is actually supposed to be stoic and confused all the time. The typecast is a slap in the face, but at least Reeves and his agent clearly know this is the only type of role he can do well.The best way to sum up "Darkly" is to call it a combination of classic literary science-fiction, Hunter S. Thompson and "Pulp Fiction." It's bizarre, humorous in a dark way and ultimately eye-opening.~Steven CVisit my site http://moviemusereviews.com

confusing but thought-provoking sci-fi fable

tt0405296

Like most works by the late Phillip K. Dick, "A Scanner Darkly" provides stinging social commentary embedded in a deeply disturbing vision of a dystopian future. Based on some of his own experiences with drug addiction and rehabilitation, Dick's 1977 novel tells the complex tale of a man who, through an illicit drug he is taking, becomes a split personality, with one half of him being an addict and the other half being a narc - but with neither half aware of the other half's existence. If that sounds like a bit of a "head trip," that is clearly Dick's intent here, for what better way to capture the dreamlike and hallucinatory nature of psychedelic, mind-altering drugs? And what better way for a filmmaker to reproduce that effect on film than through the technique known as "rotoscoping," in which live actors are filmed doing their scenes, then later drawn over and turned into seamlessly flowing animation? This is the style made famous in the 1980's with the A-Ha video "Take on Me" and Linklater's own full length feature in the '90's, "Waking Life." In the case of "A Scanner Darkly," especially, its use results in a perfect marriage of form and content.In this prescient tale set in the "near future," Keanu Reeves plays the undercover cop, Agent Fred, who, under the pseudonym Bob Arctor, is sent to live in a home with several known drug addicts: Barris, played by Robert Downey Jr. and Luckman, played by Woody Harrelson. When Fred begins taking the newly fabricated drug known as "Substance D," which causes the two hemispheres of the brain to disconnect and go to war with one another, Fred/Arctor becomes essentially two distinctly separate persons, so that, in his capacity as an undercover agent, he is actually spying on himself without realizing it. Winona Ryder appears as Donna, the beautiful but sexually frigid coke addict who becomes Arctor's girlfriend."A Scanner Darkly" is an easy film for a viewer to get lost in, so it pays to know a little something about the story before heading into it. As a screenwriter, Linklater captures the woozy insubstantiality of the drug experience well enough but often at the expense of narrative consistency and coherence, especially for the uninitiated. I'm afraid lots of people may become frustrated and confused near the beginning and simply tune out. That would be a real shame because the movie turns into a darkly fascinating rumination on the effect drug use has on the mind, while at the same time raising the ethical issue of just how far the government should go in "sacrificing" innocent victims to achieve a desired, perhaps even laudable, end. At times the movie may seem to be playing both sides of the drug-war fence, yet the sophistication and complexity of Dick's vision keeps it from becoming either an anti-government screed or an anti-drug diatribe.Some of the dialogue comes off as corny and over earnest, but much of it is incisive and darkly humorous, with Barris and Larkman, in particular, hitting delicious comic heights in their paranoid/delusional ravings and interchanges.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-197

ur0375636

title: confusing but thought-provoking sci-fi fable review: Like most works by the late Phillip K. Dick, "A Scanner Darkly" provides stinging social commentary embedded in a deeply disturbing vision of a dystopian future. Based on some of his own experiences with drug addiction and rehabilitation, Dick's 1977 novel tells the complex tale of a man who, through an illicit drug he is taking, becomes a split personality, with one half of him being an addict and the other half being a narc - but with neither half aware of the other half's existence. If that sounds like a bit of a "head trip," that is clearly Dick's intent here, for what better way to capture the dreamlike and hallucinatory nature of psychedelic, mind-altering drugs? And what better way for a filmmaker to reproduce that effect on film than through the technique known as "rotoscoping," in which live actors are filmed doing their scenes, then later drawn over and turned into seamlessly flowing animation? This is the style made famous in the 1980's with the A-Ha video "Take on Me" and Linklater's own full length feature in the '90's, "Waking Life." In the case of "A Scanner Darkly," especially, its use results in a perfect marriage of form and content.In this prescient tale set in the "near future," Keanu Reeves plays the undercover cop, Agent Fred, who, under the pseudonym Bob Arctor, is sent to live in a home with several known drug addicts: Barris, played by Robert Downey Jr. and Luckman, played by Woody Harrelson. When Fred begins taking the newly fabricated drug known as "Substance D," which causes the two hemispheres of the brain to disconnect and go to war with one another, Fred/Arctor becomes essentially two distinctly separate persons, so that, in his capacity as an undercover agent, he is actually spying on himself without realizing it. Winona Ryder appears as Donna, the beautiful but sexually frigid coke addict who becomes Arctor's girlfriend."A Scanner Darkly" is an easy film for a viewer to get lost in, so it pays to know a little something about the story before heading into it. As a screenwriter, Linklater captures the woozy insubstantiality of the drug experience well enough but often at the expense of narrative consistency and coherence, especially for the uninitiated. I'm afraid lots of people may become frustrated and confused near the beginning and simply tune out. That would be a real shame because the movie turns into a darkly fascinating rumination on the effect drug use has on the mind, while at the same time raising the ethical issue of just how far the government should go in "sacrificing" innocent victims to achieve a desired, perhaps even laudable, end. At times the movie may seem to be playing both sides of the drug-war fence, yet the sophistication and complexity of Dick's vision keeps it from becoming either an anti-government screed or an anti-drug diatribe.Some of the dialogue comes off as corny and over earnest, but much of it is incisive and darkly humorous, with Barris and Larkman, in particular, hitting delicious comic heights in their paranoid/delusional ravings and interchanges.

Gratitude

tt0405296

Thanks to Rick Linklater and the Dick family for allowing a Scanner Darkly to re-envision Philip K. Dick's great novel without straying from its central themes and story line. Good film adaptations of literature are very often collaborative efforts between two or more artists - the writer and the director (and sometimes her/his production team). Make no mistake - A Scanner Darkly IS one of these collaborations - it is definitely a Linklater film - from the spare but very effective and hypnotic Graham Reynolds sound track to the disturbing but mesmerizing holosuit scenes and the pseudo-philosophical paranoiac banter between Harrelson and Downey's characters. In fact, I remember the last time I read Dick's novel - around the time I heard Linklater was directing this film - thinking that some of the scenes in the book could be lost in Linklater's wonderful film "Slacker". Linklater and Dick are a perfect match.The story is about a deep-cover narcotics officer (Reeves) who is in danger of becoming one of his own targets, since he has become addicted to a very popular and addictive hallucinogen - Substance D (AKA "Death") The cast is all very good, and extremely well suited for their characters. But here again, we are seeing Linklater's interpretation of the novel. He saw the comedic potential for the Barris character and played it up by giving the role to Downey and presenting Harrelson as a combination of loyal side-kick and straight-man to Downey's sometimes overpowering Barris. What the story is really about is the culture of recreational drug use and addiction. Its portrayal of this is on target, and though the subject is treated with some sympathy, the contradictory messages, denials, and complex rationalizations permeating that culture also come through powerfully. In this manner, the film nails the book spot-on.Reeves is perfectly cast as Arctur. His subtle and somewhat detached style is exactly what was needed for this complex and sympathetic character. And although some have stated that he was "blown off the screen by Downey and Harrelson" I couldn't agree less. Downey is louder and more domineering, yes, but Arctur is not a loud, ultra-dynamic, paranoid, and could not be played in a way which could compete with Downey's character. Although I believe Winona Rider to be very talented, I had my doubts about her in the role of Donna - one of my favorite characters in Dick's novel. However, once again, Winona exceeded my expectations. I have never seen a bad performance out of her.This is great casting, period.While these are not criticisms, I feel obligated to make a couple of comments comparing the book and the film. First, the film is not really as dark and disturbing as the book. I can not explain why in this review - you will have to see it to understand why I say this. Second, I was very slightly disappointed by the reduced role of Donna in this film. Third - though some have commented that the film was hard to follow and that they felt they could only really get it if they read the book - I can only say that this is probably intentional. Yes, many of Linklater's films are non-linear and can be hard to follow for those who expect to have things explained to them. Linklater is, if nothing else, an artist and doesn't seem very interested in linearity or explanation. And the original work by Dick is no less ambiguous. In fact it is, in my opinion, more ambiguous.This film does a great job of bringing to the screen one of the most intelligent and emotional works of science fiction ever written. My thanks to all involved.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-82

ur3824745

title: Gratitude review: Thanks to Rick Linklater and the Dick family for allowing a Scanner Darkly to re-envision Philip K. Dick's great novel without straying from its central themes and story line. Good film adaptations of literature are very often collaborative efforts between two or more artists - the writer and the director (and sometimes her/his production team). Make no mistake - A Scanner Darkly IS one of these collaborations - it is definitely a Linklater film - from the spare but very effective and hypnotic Graham Reynolds sound track to the disturbing but mesmerizing holosuit scenes and the pseudo-philosophical paranoiac banter between Harrelson and Downey's characters. In fact, I remember the last time I read Dick's novel - around the time I heard Linklater was directing this film - thinking that some of the scenes in the book could be lost in Linklater's wonderful film "Slacker". Linklater and Dick are a perfect match.The story is about a deep-cover narcotics officer (Reeves) who is in danger of becoming one of his own targets, since he has become addicted to a very popular and addictive hallucinogen - Substance D (AKA "Death") The cast is all very good, and extremely well suited for their characters. But here again, we are seeing Linklater's interpretation of the novel. He saw the comedic potential for the Barris character and played it up by giving the role to Downey and presenting Harrelson as a combination of loyal side-kick and straight-man to Downey's sometimes overpowering Barris. What the story is really about is the culture of recreational drug use and addiction. Its portrayal of this is on target, and though the subject is treated with some sympathy, the contradictory messages, denials, and complex rationalizations permeating that culture also come through powerfully. In this manner, the film nails the book spot-on.Reeves is perfectly cast as Arctur. His subtle and somewhat detached style is exactly what was needed for this complex and sympathetic character. And although some have stated that he was "blown off the screen by Downey and Harrelson" I couldn't agree less. Downey is louder and more domineering, yes, but Arctur is not a loud, ultra-dynamic, paranoid, and could not be played in a way which could compete with Downey's character. Although I believe Winona Rider to be very talented, I had my doubts about her in the role of Donna - one of my favorite characters in Dick's novel. However, once again, Winona exceeded my expectations. I have never seen a bad performance out of her.This is great casting, period.While these are not criticisms, I feel obligated to make a couple of comments comparing the book and the film. First, the film is not really as dark and disturbing as the book. I can not explain why in this review - you will have to see it to understand why I say this. Second, I was very slightly disappointed by the reduced role of Donna in this film. Third - though some have commented that the film was hard to follow and that they felt they could only really get it if they read the book - I can only say that this is probably intentional. Yes, many of Linklater's films are non-linear and can be hard to follow for those who expect to have things explained to them. Linklater is, if nothing else, an artist and doesn't seem very interested in linearity or explanation. And the original work by Dick is no less ambiguous. In fact it is, in my opinion, more ambiguous.This film does a great job of bringing to the screen one of the most intelligent and emotional works of science fiction ever written. My thanks to all involved.

looks like a cool idea but does not deliver

tt0405296

Using a script based on a story of a science-fiction classic, and melding it in an animation film where drawn characters replicate the faces of known actors who then borrow their voices - well, this looks like a cool idea and should have resulted in my kind of movie. Unfortunately 'A Scanner Darkly' never takes off, and the reason is that the original story is diluted into a long series of dialogs who may have somehow made it to the viewer if the real actors acted but their two dimensional counter-parts are not capable of making the same impression and sustaining the film. The directors intentionally avoided too sophisticated effects, and rather restrained themselves to the classical comics book look, this is stylish but not too appealing. The best part of the film is the ending, with the last 15 minutes of the story giving a good quality twist and a different perspective, but this comes too late and if I survived the rest it was with a great effort of patience. Disappointing.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-261

ur0547823

title: looks like a cool idea but does not deliver review: Using a script based on a story of a science-fiction classic, and melding it in an animation film where drawn characters replicate the faces of known actors who then borrow their voices - well, this looks like a cool idea and should have resulted in my kind of movie. Unfortunately 'A Scanner Darkly' never takes off, and the reason is that the original story is diluted into a long series of dialogs who may have somehow made it to the viewer if the real actors acted but their two dimensional counter-parts are not capable of making the same impression and sustaining the film. The directors intentionally avoided too sophisticated effects, and rather restrained themselves to the classical comics book look, this is stylish but not too appealing. The best part of the film is the ending, with the last 15 minutes of the story giving a good quality twist and a different perspective, but this comes too late and if I survived the rest it was with a great effort of patience. Disappointing.

an interesting movie which could have been handled better

tt0405296

for me the biggest problem with this movie is that the creators of it are artists with no real comprehension about what it would be like to be the subject of a law enforcement or government related conspiracythe makers almost certainly would have benefited by talking to some people who have actually been the subject of this kind of process. for example ex government or law enforcement employees who have been the subject of an internal investigation for example, wrongly accused, set up, put under surveillance etc as a result too much air play is given to the 'druggie' or artsy elements, and Keanu Reeves just gets carried along like a piece of flotsam instead of fully engaging with or reacting to the situation he is facing. We feel his paranoia slightly on a drug induced level, but it never really permeates any deeper even the druggie side of things isn't handled too realistically. all we really get are drug taking caricatures, and we never really get inside their headsi did find the visual style to be interesting, and mostly enjoyed seeing how it altered the soundtrack. Since the visuals are not strictly real, the sound is invited to follow suit. Overall they had much more flexibility with regards to the sound than usual, and didn't technically have to record sound during production at all. As a result the soundtrack is very stripped down, quiet and claustrophobic, and quite experimental. It has a definite edginess and character to it, but again i do feel that so much more could have been done beyond the sonic weirdness this is an interesting movie but it could have been a much more enjoyable one with a greater understanding of the subject material

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-250

ur3328034

title: an interesting movie which could have been handled better review: for me the biggest problem with this movie is that the creators of it are artists with no real comprehension about what it would be like to be the subject of a law enforcement or government related conspiracythe makers almost certainly would have benefited by talking to some people who have actually been the subject of this kind of process. for example ex government or law enforcement employees who have been the subject of an internal investigation for example, wrongly accused, set up, put under surveillance etc as a result too much air play is given to the 'druggie' or artsy elements, and Keanu Reeves just gets carried along like a piece of flotsam instead of fully engaging with or reacting to the situation he is facing. We feel his paranoia slightly on a drug induced level, but it never really permeates any deeper even the druggie side of things isn't handled too realistically. all we really get are drug taking caricatures, and we never really get inside their headsi did find the visual style to be interesting, and mostly enjoyed seeing how it altered the soundtrack. Since the visuals are not strictly real, the sound is invited to follow suit. Overall they had much more flexibility with regards to the sound than usual, and didn't technically have to record sound during production at all. As a result the soundtrack is very stripped down, quiet and claustrophobic, and quite experimental. It has a definite edginess and character to it, but again i do feel that so much more could have been done beyond the sonic weirdness this is an interesting movie but it could have been a much more enjoyable one with a greater understanding of the subject material

The most visually stunning movie I've seen in years.

tt0405296

This movie has awesome combination of animation and live action together. I never thought it could be bind together so perfectly. Mixed with a well known cast Rory Cochrane(you remember from The Last Don) Robert Downey Jr. And Woody Harrelson(Who both seem to have the wittiest lines. and Winona Ryder and Keanu Reeves(who both seem to pull off amazingly performances despite what the critics say). The movie is set a few years from now, there is a drug called Substance D. That seems to be taking over. A cop is asked to spy on his friends, but soon finds himself getting addicted. A truly great film, great performance. It tops Sin City(2005) has in the case of being visually stunning. To bad Philip K. Dick did not live to see this pictures release.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-62

ur4593705

title: The most visually stunning movie I've seen in years. review: This movie has awesome combination of animation and live action together. I never thought it could be bind together so perfectly. Mixed with a well known cast Rory Cochrane(you remember from The Last Don) Robert Downey Jr. And Woody Harrelson(Who both seem to have the wittiest lines. and Winona Ryder and Keanu Reeves(who both seem to pull off amazingly performances despite what the critics say). The movie is set a few years from now, there is a drug called Substance D. That seems to be taking over. A cop is asked to spy on his friends, but soon finds himself getting addicted. A truly great film, great performance. It tops Sin City(2005) has in the case of being visually stunning. To bad Philip K. Dick did not live to see this pictures release.

A modern classic.... ***** (out of five)

tt0405296

I had to travel two and half hours to get to see this film as it was not showing in my local cinemas. But boy it was worth it! This is undoubtedly the film of the year so far. Its head and shoulders above everything else. Its extremely inventive and original, gets across some truly powerful messages, has wonderful performances and the rotoscoping animation looks absolutely stunning. Its great to see someone has finally done a Phillip K. Dick novel the way you feel he would have wanted. The film also manages to be very funny at times. Robert Downey Jnr and Woody Harrelson are a hoot. Its great to see the wonderful Winona Ryder back on our screens (so brilliant in Heathers and Edward Scissorhands) and I would also like to commend Keanu Reeves. This is an actor who gets a lot of criticism unjustly I feel. He gives a mesmerising performance here and should be up for an Oscar (although knowing the idiotic Acadamy he won't) He has also given brilliant turns in films like The Matrix and Thumbsucker which are overlooked. This was also a very commendable and brave film for him to do. He clearly isn't like a lot of other actors who are just happy to make terrible blockbusters and pick up a big paycheck.Kudos to Richard Linklater one of the most diverse directors working today for crafting a masterful film and being faithful to the source material. His direction is absolutely spot-on, as is everything in the film. This film is destined to become a cult classic and rightly so because as far as I'm concerned its a bona fide masterpiece!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-123

ur1272311

title: A modern classic.... ***** (out of five) review: I had to travel two and half hours to get to see this film as it was not showing in my local cinemas. But boy it was worth it! This is undoubtedly the film of the year so far. Its head and shoulders above everything else. Its extremely inventive and original, gets across some truly powerful messages, has wonderful performances and the rotoscoping animation looks absolutely stunning. Its great to see someone has finally done a Phillip K. Dick novel the way you feel he would have wanted. The film also manages to be very funny at times. Robert Downey Jnr and Woody Harrelson are a hoot. Its great to see the wonderful Winona Ryder back on our screens (so brilliant in Heathers and Edward Scissorhands) and I would also like to commend Keanu Reeves. This is an actor who gets a lot of criticism unjustly I feel. He gives a mesmerising performance here and should be up for an Oscar (although knowing the idiotic Acadamy he won't) He has also given brilliant turns in films like The Matrix and Thumbsucker which are overlooked. This was also a very commendable and brave film for him to do. He clearly isn't like a lot of other actors who are just happy to make terrible blockbusters and pick up a big paycheck.Kudos to Richard Linklater one of the most diverse directors working today for crafting a masterful film and being faithful to the source material. His direction is absolutely spot-on, as is everything in the film. This film is destined to become a cult classic and rightly so because as far as I'm concerned its a bona fide masterpiece!

Apparently, drugs are bad.

tt0405296

A SCANNER DARKLY Written and Directed by Richard LinklaterThree men drive down an American highway on a mission. They are driving to a neighbouring city and they plan on partying it up on the way, while they're there and all the way home again. Their drug of choice is Substance D, what will be the most popular drug seven years from now, when A SCANNER DARKLY takes place. While speeding along, the car breaks down. What ensues is a hilarious journey into the far depths of drug-induced paranoia. They debate whether this car trouble was pre-meditated, whether their home is simultaneously being ransacked by the same people who sabotaged their car … whether one of them actually anticipated this entire series of events and left the door unlocked and an invitation to enter taped to the front of it. Their plans have been ruined but what they don't realize is that there was nothing special about this occasion as getting messed up is pretty much what they do every day. As ridiculous as this sequence is, it is also completely useless. It is one in a long string of pointless scenes that are told in a disjointed fashion to give character to what is otherwise a flat and uninteresting film.A SCANNER DARKLY is director Richard Linklater's second film to implement an animation technique called rotoscoping, where loosely flowing animation is laid over filmed live-action sequences. The results are mesmerizing and hypnotic. It is also a technique that is capable of accomplishing what most directors have struggled with for years. It creates the illusion that Keanu Reeves can actually act. Joining Reeves in this animated parallel universe are Robert Downey Jr, Woody Harrelson and Winona Ryder. Reeves plays an undercover narcotics agent named Bob Arctor, who can't seem to differentiate between his personas. The drugs have blurred his existence to the point that he can't quite grasp whether the images of a wife and family that he has in his mind are a memory or just an image. As his confusion grows, so does his addiction. The results make it difficult to ascertain what life Arctor is actually leading. Shortly before the film ends, Linklater reveals an element that explains all the jarring elements encountered along the way. Suddenly, the story becomes clear and it is seen as nothing more than a straightforward nark story. The explanation may solidify the arch but it doesn't appease any frustration one might have, having spent so long trying to make sense of what one thought was something different. Substance D keeps Linklater's characters detached from each other and themselves. Although the majority of the characters are addicts without a history, Arctor fell into drugs as a reaction to the perfection he thought he had achieved in his life. Adapting author Philip K. Dick's autobiographical account of how he fell into drugs, Linklater reinforces how people spend so much time walking blindly towards the achievements they always felt would make their life significant and full. The rejection of that comfort through drug usage ultimately leads to a much larger sense of discomfort. It makes the idea of getting close to someone in a sober, authentic context unthinkable and frightening. Finally, Arctor has run away from intimacy and finds himself wanting to have that again but not being capable of having it because his world no longer makes any sense.The beauty of A SCANNER DARKLY is in its aesthetic. Remove that and I doubt the film would be watchable. Linklater's previous attempt at this style, WAKING LIFE, was infinitely more successful because the technique lends to the psychedelic dreamscape setting and existentialist-themed conversations. Here, the technique is a life preserver for a bunch of drowning druggies.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-86

ur1982210

title: Apparently, drugs are bad. review: A SCANNER DARKLY Written and Directed by Richard LinklaterThree men drive down an American highway on a mission. They are driving to a neighbouring city and they plan on partying it up on the way, while they're there and all the way home again. Their drug of choice is Substance D, what will be the most popular drug seven years from now, when A SCANNER DARKLY takes place. While speeding along, the car breaks down. What ensues is a hilarious journey into the far depths of drug-induced paranoia. They debate whether this car trouble was pre-meditated, whether their home is simultaneously being ransacked by the same people who sabotaged their car … whether one of them actually anticipated this entire series of events and left the door unlocked and an invitation to enter taped to the front of it. Their plans have been ruined but what they don't realize is that there was nothing special about this occasion as getting messed up is pretty much what they do every day. As ridiculous as this sequence is, it is also completely useless. It is one in a long string of pointless scenes that are told in a disjointed fashion to give character to what is otherwise a flat and uninteresting film.A SCANNER DARKLY is director Richard Linklater's second film to implement an animation technique called rotoscoping, where loosely flowing animation is laid over filmed live-action sequences. The results are mesmerizing and hypnotic. It is also a technique that is capable of accomplishing what most directors have struggled with for years. It creates the illusion that Keanu Reeves can actually act. Joining Reeves in this animated parallel universe are Robert Downey Jr, Woody Harrelson and Winona Ryder. Reeves plays an undercover narcotics agent named Bob Arctor, who can't seem to differentiate between his personas. The drugs have blurred his existence to the point that he can't quite grasp whether the images of a wife and family that he has in his mind are a memory or just an image. As his confusion grows, so does his addiction. The results make it difficult to ascertain what life Arctor is actually leading. Shortly before the film ends, Linklater reveals an element that explains all the jarring elements encountered along the way. Suddenly, the story becomes clear and it is seen as nothing more than a straightforward nark story. The explanation may solidify the arch but it doesn't appease any frustration one might have, having spent so long trying to make sense of what one thought was something different. Substance D keeps Linklater's characters detached from each other and themselves. Although the majority of the characters are addicts without a history, Arctor fell into drugs as a reaction to the perfection he thought he had achieved in his life. Adapting author Philip K. Dick's autobiographical account of how he fell into drugs, Linklater reinforces how people spend so much time walking blindly towards the achievements they always felt would make their life significant and full. The rejection of that comfort through drug usage ultimately leads to a much larger sense of discomfort. It makes the idea of getting close to someone in a sober, authentic context unthinkable and frightening. Finally, Arctor has run away from intimacy and finds himself wanting to have that again but not being capable of having it because his world no longer makes any sense.The beauty of A SCANNER DARKLY is in its aesthetic. Remove that and I doubt the film would be watchable. Linklater's previous attempt at this style, WAKING LIFE, was infinitely more successful because the technique lends to the psychedelic dreamscape setting and existentialist-themed conversations. Here, the technique is a life preserver for a bunch of drowning druggies.

An excellent and truly unique piece of film-making

tt0405296

After seeing the trailer last year, I was hooked. I needed to see A Scanner Darkly. I may not have necessarily had any idea what the movie was about, but just that first trailer was enough to make me need to see it. Sadly, time passed and it was not released, but when it finally was, it was only as a limited release. Thankfully, after a few more months wait (and a great twenty minute Internet preview), I finally saw the film. And despite what I have read, it is quite enjoyable.Scanner is first and foremost, a movie about drugs and the effects they have on people. In the not so distant future, police units in California are using "scanner suits", full body outfits which scramble the image and voice of the user making them totally unrecognizable, to catch drug dealers and users. Their biggest task for these "scanners" is trying to rid the state of a drug called "Substance D", which is basically frying the brains of all of its users. One such user is Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves), a scanner (referred to anonymously in the police headquarters as Fred), whose current case involves spying on his drug using friends James (Robert Downey Jr.), Ernie (Woody Harrelson) and his girlfriend Donna (Winona Ryder), as well as himself, in attempts to find out some further information for the police to use.While not being truly revolutionary, the film is still an absolute marvel to watch. Much like his earlier work in Waking Life (which I have yet to see), writer/director Richard Linklater has employed thousands of cartoon artists to animate over the actors and set pieces and what results is an almost truly seamless blend of real-life and animation. The actors, the props and the sets look real enough, but are totally animated. Some may get bored after watching these effects taking place for some time, but I was absolutely fascinated by the look of the film from start to finish. It looks extraordinary, and felt more worthwhile a film than it would have had it been shown in real life with tons of expensive CGI shots.The line between reality and animation is totally blurred in this film. The bizarre, yet astonishing, visuals allowed me to feel as if I was on the same drugs as the characters were. And in that respect, the realism of the entire film is amped up to immensely high levels. There were times that I struggled to comprehend whether I was actually watching Keanu Reeves act on screen, or if I was just watching an animated character that looked and sounded a hell of a lot like him. It is truly wondrous, and I would not be surprised if the techniques used here, are used a lot more in the future.While the essential and probably best drug film is the absolutely brilliant Requiem for a Dream, this film really comes close in portraying what it is like as a drug addict. The astonishing visuals portray a world of hallucination and of total doubt; a dystopic world that no one should ever have to be a part of. The film hammers home the point of the deterioration of the human mind and body when you are on drugs, and while not being as required a watch as Requiem, it stands out as a great futuristic companion piece. The film, much like Requiem, really toys with your mind. Consistently, you will find uncertainty in whether you should neutral, shocked or laughing at the events unfolding. The film crosses that very razor thin line, and teeters across it for its entirety.Reeves' portrayal of Arctor is excellent. His emotions are well communicated, and the pathos that you feel for his character is genuine and real. Yeah, the big goof may still be goofy, but he does a more than adequate job on his performance here. Downey Jr. is excellent as his character, who seems like he may truly be on the brink of insanity. His performance could have easily been very one-dimensional, but he infuses a lot of zest into the material, and makes his character so much stronger and different than the rest. Ryder is great in her supporting turn, and Harrelson and Rory Cochrane practically steal the show when they are on screen. It is just too bad that they do not stay up there for as long as the other three.If the film has any problem whatsoever, it is that the film stretches out far too long. Those one hundred minutes progress fairly slowly, and even at its most pinnacle of interesting parts, the film still feels a bit too padded and long winded. This could be attributed to the fact that the film wants the audience, already in a drug-induced mindset, to digest so much more than they should be, or could simply be that Linklater pumped in far too many sequences and events into the film. Either way, while the film is a great watch, it could have done with a bit more trimmed out.The film could have been shorter, but as it stands, is great. The look of the film is outstanding, and really extends the realism level up for the audience. If you ever wanted to know what it would be like if you were having an acid trip, this excellent and truly unique piece of film-making would be it.8.5/10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-139

ur1622466

title: An excellent and truly unique piece of film-making review: After seeing the trailer last year, I was hooked. I needed to see A Scanner Darkly. I may not have necessarily had any idea what the movie was about, but just that first trailer was enough to make me need to see it. Sadly, time passed and it was not released, but when it finally was, it was only as a limited release. Thankfully, after a few more months wait (and a great twenty minute Internet preview), I finally saw the film. And despite what I have read, it is quite enjoyable.Scanner is first and foremost, a movie about drugs and the effects they have on people. In the not so distant future, police units in California are using "scanner suits", full body outfits which scramble the image and voice of the user making them totally unrecognizable, to catch drug dealers and users. Their biggest task for these "scanners" is trying to rid the state of a drug called "Substance D", which is basically frying the brains of all of its users. One such user is Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves), a scanner (referred to anonymously in the police headquarters as Fred), whose current case involves spying on his drug using friends James (Robert Downey Jr.), Ernie (Woody Harrelson) and his girlfriend Donna (Winona Ryder), as well as himself, in attempts to find out some further information for the police to use.While not being truly revolutionary, the film is still an absolute marvel to watch. Much like his earlier work in Waking Life (which I have yet to see), writer/director Richard Linklater has employed thousands of cartoon artists to animate over the actors and set pieces and what results is an almost truly seamless blend of real-life and animation. The actors, the props and the sets look real enough, but are totally animated. Some may get bored after watching these effects taking place for some time, but I was absolutely fascinated by the look of the film from start to finish. It looks extraordinary, and felt more worthwhile a film than it would have had it been shown in real life with tons of expensive CGI shots.The line between reality and animation is totally blurred in this film. The bizarre, yet astonishing, visuals allowed me to feel as if I was on the same drugs as the characters were. And in that respect, the realism of the entire film is amped up to immensely high levels. There were times that I struggled to comprehend whether I was actually watching Keanu Reeves act on screen, or if I was just watching an animated character that looked and sounded a hell of a lot like him. It is truly wondrous, and I would not be surprised if the techniques used here, are used a lot more in the future.While the essential and probably best drug film is the absolutely brilliant Requiem for a Dream, this film really comes close in portraying what it is like as a drug addict. The astonishing visuals portray a world of hallucination and of total doubt; a dystopic world that no one should ever have to be a part of. The film hammers home the point of the deterioration of the human mind and body when you are on drugs, and while not being as required a watch as Requiem, it stands out as a great futuristic companion piece. The film, much like Requiem, really toys with your mind. Consistently, you will find uncertainty in whether you should neutral, shocked or laughing at the events unfolding. The film crosses that very razor thin line, and teeters across it for its entirety.Reeves' portrayal of Arctor is excellent. His emotions are well communicated, and the pathos that you feel for his character is genuine and real. Yeah, the big goof may still be goofy, but he does a more than adequate job on his performance here. Downey Jr. is excellent as his character, who seems like he may truly be on the brink of insanity. His performance could have easily been very one-dimensional, but he infuses a lot of zest into the material, and makes his character so much stronger and different than the rest. Ryder is great in her supporting turn, and Harrelson and Rory Cochrane practically steal the show when they are on screen. It is just too bad that they do not stay up there for as long as the other three.If the film has any problem whatsoever, it is that the film stretches out far too long. Those one hundred minutes progress fairly slowly, and even at its most pinnacle of interesting parts, the film still feels a bit too padded and long winded. This could be attributed to the fact that the film wants the audience, already in a drug-induced mindset, to digest so much more than they should be, or could simply be that Linklater pumped in far too many sequences and events into the film. Either way, while the film is a great watch, it could have done with a bit more trimmed out.The film could have been shorter, but as it stands, is great. The look of the film is outstanding, and really extends the realism level up for the audience. If you ever wanted to know what it would be like if you were having an acid trip, this excellent and truly unique piece of film-making would be it.8.5/10.

Well blended and animated sci-fi film

tt0405296

This film is based on a book by Philip K. Dick. Now I haven't read any of his books yet but from what I heard this is a solid adaptation. And this is a pretty darn good conspiracy film about a guy coping with his surroundings and a drug called Substance D. A drug that causes bizarre hallucination and makes them go all schizo and paranoid. It's basically a film that might be difficult to comprehend at first but you get use to it and it all makes clear to a degree. Keanu Reeves plays a guy named Bob Arctor who goes by other aliases. Now I don't think Keanu Reeves is a brilliant actor but he usually fits the roles he is given and in this case just perfectly. Keanu is really good at playing these confused and apathetic roles. Just about everyone is right for the roles they were given for this film. Robert Downey, Jr. is good at playing these pedantic and slightly weird characters and he nails it in this. Woody Harrelson is alright in this. But the guy that really nails it in this is Rory Cochrane, who is this jumpy, twitchy and overly paranoid character. And Rorly plays him flawlessly. Winona Ryder is also in this but felt that a bunch of other actresses could have played her role. When it comes down to it, it's the interactions between these characters that is the primary focus. And the conversations and the direction is clever and sometimes dumb(in a good way) but mostly amusing. This movie is shot with real actors but rendered into animation. Which adds to the weirdness of this film and bring out more of that trippy feel while it being cool and all. But wondered why they picked this subtle movie to do that in. Cause if they could have picked a story with explosions, car chases and other special effects and just used animation. It would have saved themselves a lot of budget and still could have gotten away with it in the audiences eyes. Although the animation rendering works in this film and doesn't seem like a gimmick. And even has couple of messages that can keep the audiences that watch this film thinking. And it's clever with it's execution, despite a twist when it hits I wondered how I could have missed that. Overall this is a good sci-fi conspiracy film that is well blended together. It's just a shame this film bombed at the box office.7.4/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-315

ur22171966

title: Well blended and animated sci-fi film review: This film is based on a book by Philip K. Dick. Now I haven't read any of his books yet but from what I heard this is a solid adaptation. And this is a pretty darn good conspiracy film about a guy coping with his surroundings and a drug called Substance D. A drug that causes bizarre hallucination and makes them go all schizo and paranoid. It's basically a film that might be difficult to comprehend at first but you get use to it and it all makes clear to a degree. Keanu Reeves plays a guy named Bob Arctor who goes by other aliases. Now I don't think Keanu Reeves is a brilliant actor but he usually fits the roles he is given and in this case just perfectly. Keanu is really good at playing these confused and apathetic roles. Just about everyone is right for the roles they were given for this film. Robert Downey, Jr. is good at playing these pedantic and slightly weird characters and he nails it in this. Woody Harrelson is alright in this. But the guy that really nails it in this is Rory Cochrane, who is this jumpy, twitchy and overly paranoid character. And Rorly plays him flawlessly. Winona Ryder is also in this but felt that a bunch of other actresses could have played her role. When it comes down to it, it's the interactions between these characters that is the primary focus. And the conversations and the direction is clever and sometimes dumb(in a good way) but mostly amusing. This movie is shot with real actors but rendered into animation. Which adds to the weirdness of this film and bring out more of that trippy feel while it being cool and all. But wondered why they picked this subtle movie to do that in. Cause if they could have picked a story with explosions, car chases and other special effects and just used animation. It would have saved themselves a lot of budget and still could have gotten away with it in the audiences eyes. Although the animation rendering works in this film and doesn't seem like a gimmick. And even has couple of messages that can keep the audiences that watch this film thinking. And it's clever with it's execution, despite a twist when it hits I wondered how I could have missed that. Overall this is a good sci-fi conspiracy film that is well blended together. It's just a shame this film bombed at the box office.7.4/10

The Pen is stronger than the Reel ! (DVD)

tt0405296

This is the adaptation of my favorite book from my favorite writer Dick. If the previous tries opened debate (see "Blade Runner), this one won't close it either.The movie is good but it lacks something, as usual.As I read the book before, the difference is more obvious and can't be solved: the inner voice of the writer. When I read the lines in the book, i was enthralled; when i see the movie, it is has become much softened. You can shoot whatever you want, books & words have qualities that aren't shared by frames & pictures.Here, visual isn't best to describe the split of personality of Fred/Actor and his feelings of this upside-down world! In addition, the choice for animation is interesting, but the result isn't convincing: for a corrupt government, and drug destruction, colors are too fun! Finally, maybe the most respectful adaptation of Dick's works but his books are always on top! And contrary to "Blow", it is absolutely not a apology of drugs!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-251

ur1803589

title: The Pen is stronger than the Reel ! (DVD) review: This is the adaptation of my favorite book from my favorite writer Dick. If the previous tries opened debate (see "Blade Runner), this one won't close it either.The movie is good but it lacks something, as usual.As I read the book before, the difference is more obvious and can't be solved: the inner voice of the writer. When I read the lines in the book, i was enthralled; when i see the movie, it is has become much softened. You can shoot whatever you want, books & words have qualities that aren't shared by frames & pictures.Here, visual isn't best to describe the split of personality of Fred/Actor and his feelings of this upside-down world! In addition, the choice for animation is interesting, but the result isn't convincing: for a corrupt government, and drug destruction, colors are too fun! Finally, maybe the most respectful adaptation of Dick's works but his books are always on top! And contrary to "Blow", it is absolutely not a apology of drugs!

Brilliant, extraordinary graphics with an outstanding storyline

tt0405296

This film was made original with the graphics that the story was based around. The whole reason of the graphics was emphasised was the concept of the storyline involving drugs, which was another reason why the film was so good.Rory Cochrane, Robert Downey Junior and Woodey Harrelson deserve much praise for their roles. To extent Winona Ryder was able to pull off being whacked, but Keanu Reeves really let the film down as the main character. Not only does he remain emotionless, he made the ending of the film less climatic, which any actor nowadays would have been been able to pull off. I will give him the praise for his transformation into the emotionless human at the end though.Overall, great film, emphasised the outcome of drugs to a greater extent.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-242

ur5748766

title: Brilliant, extraordinary graphics with an outstanding storyline review: This film was made original with the graphics that the story was based around. The whole reason of the graphics was emphasised was the concept of the storyline involving drugs, which was another reason why the film was so good.Rory Cochrane, Robert Downey Junior and Woodey Harrelson deserve much praise for their roles. To extent Winona Ryder was able to pull off being whacked, but Keanu Reeves really let the film down as the main character. Not only does he remain emotionless, he made the ending of the film less climatic, which any actor nowadays would have been been able to pull off. I will give him the praise for his transformation into the emotionless human at the end though.Overall, great film, emphasised the outcome of drugs to a greater extent.

based on a story by Phillip K.

tt0405296

I suppose you have to be able to "just say 'no'" to all the over-bloated hi-tech sci-fi films of the past 30 years to really appreciate this film. It was clearly decided beforehand that the film would present the gritty, decaying post-industrial world in which the story was written, rather than the oh-so-flashy metal-and-neon future sci-fi film fans seem to love. But that plays as a plus for me, because, now well into the 21st Century, the future looks more depressingly like the present than ever before, except more crowded and with a lot fewer natural resources, and a lot less wealth, to go around.This is decidedly a '70s throwback, all the way around, but as such it is clever, funny, moving in an oddly nostalgic way, and ultimately very depressing - yep, that was the '70s, all right.Another major positive of this film is its evident love and admiration for the writing of Phillip K. Dick. (Really, if all you've seen is Blade Runner, Minority Report, Paycheck and Total Recall - basically, you haven't yet seen a filming of any story by Dick; this is really the first.) I've rarely seen a film based on a work of fiction so devoted to its original material. The clever animation effects show a real struggle to reproduce the poetry of Dick's exposition, while the dialog presents his lines with a quiet but equally poetic dramatic effect.Not an easy movie to sit through, full of disturbed characters and disturbing situations, but ultimately satisfying, and probably the only movie of which it can be truly said "based on a story by Phillip K. Dick".

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-243

ur4627372

title: based on a story by Phillip K. review: I suppose you have to be able to "just say 'no'" to all the over-bloated hi-tech sci-fi films of the past 30 years to really appreciate this film. It was clearly decided beforehand that the film would present the gritty, decaying post-industrial world in which the story was written, rather than the oh-so-flashy metal-and-neon future sci-fi film fans seem to love. But that plays as a plus for me, because, now well into the 21st Century, the future looks more depressingly like the present than ever before, except more crowded and with a lot fewer natural resources, and a lot less wealth, to go around.This is decidedly a '70s throwback, all the way around, but as such it is clever, funny, moving in an oddly nostalgic way, and ultimately very depressing - yep, that was the '70s, all right.Another major positive of this film is its evident love and admiration for the writing of Phillip K. Dick. (Really, if all you've seen is Blade Runner, Minority Report, Paycheck and Total Recall - basically, you haven't yet seen a filming of any story by Dick; this is really the first.) I've rarely seen a film based on a work of fiction so devoted to its original material. The clever animation effects show a real struggle to reproduce the poetry of Dick's exposition, while the dialog presents his lines with a quiet but equally poetic dramatic effect.Not an easy movie to sit through, full of disturbed characters and disturbing situations, but ultimately satisfying, and probably the only movie of which it can be truly said "based on a story by Phillip K. Dick".

Just good enough.

tt0405296

With the use of rotoscoping, this clearly was an experimental project, that didn't entirely paid off, by the end.Its techniques and visual style help to make this an original movie to watch but when you look past this, the movie has little else to offer. The main story doesn't always work out that compelling, since most the time it is just meandering around and there isn't really being a good enough conflict in it story. At least not in its first half. It tries to create this but it doesn't ever get handled or developed properly enough and doesn't work out, until its last half hour, or so.For me the movie was just too often about nothing. I know that it's supposed to about the slow descent of a drug addict, so not everything is supposed to make sense or follow a fast paced, action packed main story but surely they could had spiced up things a bit more at times, with some shorter sequences, some more interesting dialog and by letting its main characters do some more interesting stuff. Some character now instead come across as redundant ones and too many of them don't help to let its story move along.And while the whole rotoscoping thing in this movie helps to make it unique and gives the movie a strong visual style, it was not something I was always too fond of or impressed with. Sometimes when the camera moved around the effects looked flat, literally. And besides, the whole effect looks like a layer, which you can simply apply to your movie, with any random big editing program. But apparently it all wasn't as easy as it looks, since post-production for this movie went on for 18 months.The one thing I did really like about this movie, was Robert Downey Jr.'s performance. It was the highlight of the movie for me and the only thing that was truly fun and interesting about it. Lots of other great actors also appear in this movie but none of them works out as well as Downey Jr. did. And no, Keanu Reeves is not horrible, his character is just kind of flat but I think this was more due to its writing and directing approach, that deliberately tried to make his character one that was more of an introvert one.An interesting movie experiment, that didn't entirely worked out but is still worth a watch.6/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-312

ur1416505

title: Just good enough. review: With the use of rotoscoping, this clearly was an experimental project, that didn't entirely paid off, by the end.Its techniques and visual style help to make this an original movie to watch but when you look past this, the movie has little else to offer. The main story doesn't always work out that compelling, since most the time it is just meandering around and there isn't really being a good enough conflict in it story. At least not in its first half. It tries to create this but it doesn't ever get handled or developed properly enough and doesn't work out, until its last half hour, or so.For me the movie was just too often about nothing. I know that it's supposed to about the slow descent of a drug addict, so not everything is supposed to make sense or follow a fast paced, action packed main story but surely they could had spiced up things a bit more at times, with some shorter sequences, some more interesting dialog and by letting its main characters do some more interesting stuff. Some character now instead come across as redundant ones and too many of them don't help to let its story move along.And while the whole rotoscoping thing in this movie helps to make it unique and gives the movie a strong visual style, it was not something I was always too fond of or impressed with. Sometimes when the camera moved around the effects looked flat, literally. And besides, the whole effect looks like a layer, which you can simply apply to your movie, with any random big editing program. But apparently it all wasn't as easy as it looks, since post-production for this movie went on for 18 months.The one thing I did really like about this movie, was Robert Downey Jr.'s performance. It was the highlight of the movie for me and the only thing that was truly fun and interesting about it. Lots of other great actors also appear in this movie but none of them works out as well as Downey Jr. did. And no, Keanu Reeves is not horrible, his character is just kind of flat but I think this was more due to its writing and directing approach, that deliberately tried to make his character one that was more of an introvert one.An interesting movie experiment, that didn't entirely worked out but is still worth a watch.6/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Twice removed from reality

tt0405296

Philip K. Dick has long been a household name when it comes to eerie science fiction with a political twist. "Blade Runner", "Total Recall", "Minority Report", and "Paycheck" are all based on his stories, to name but the most prominent. "A Scanner Darkly" tells yet another tale of conspiracy and cognitive confusion, but stands out by its unique and compelling combination of live action and animation. Instead of trying to conceal the artificial nature of his images, Richard Linklater creates a deliberately synthetic look that rhymes well with the story's undertones of illusion, hallucination and manipulation. Think "23" meets MTV, on a storyboard drawn by Cy Twombly. Under layers of (digital) paint, Robert Downey Jr. is by far the most recognizable character, chiefly because of his fantastically twisted body language and facial ticks. But the way he stands out also says something about his co-stars. Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder, respectively, come across as constantly confused and predictably cute, both largely in line with their characters Bob and Donna. Go see it, if only for the visual thrills of ever-wobbling surfaces and shape-shifting camouflage suits. Followers of dope-head dialog will treasure discussions of bicycle and car maintenance bordering on the surreal.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-246

ur12415200

title: Twice removed from reality review: Philip K. Dick has long been a household name when it comes to eerie science fiction with a political twist. "Blade Runner", "Total Recall", "Minority Report", and "Paycheck" are all based on his stories, to name but the most prominent. "A Scanner Darkly" tells yet another tale of conspiracy and cognitive confusion, but stands out by its unique and compelling combination of live action and animation. Instead of trying to conceal the artificial nature of his images, Richard Linklater creates a deliberately synthetic look that rhymes well with the story's undertones of illusion, hallucination and manipulation. Think "23" meets MTV, on a storyboard drawn by Cy Twombly. Under layers of (digital) paint, Robert Downey Jr. is by far the most recognizable character, chiefly because of his fantastically twisted body language and facial ticks. But the way he stands out also says something about his co-stars. Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder, respectively, come across as constantly confused and predictably cute, both largely in line with their characters Bob and Donna. Go see it, if only for the visual thrills of ever-wobbling surfaces and shape-shifting camouflage suits. Followers of dope-head dialog will treasure discussions of bicycle and car maintenance bordering on the surreal.

This movie SCANNED my senses!!

tt0405296

A SCANNER DARKLEY was amazing. I was impressed by the animation. Wynona Ryder was forgettable as always. However, I totally agree with other folks who have commented that this movie is like taking shrooms or other drugs and just hanging out with dudes tripping out. I liked it a lot. Some of the plot was hard to comprehend. I wanted to see A Prairie Home Companion but it was sold out. I am glad that I saw this. There were many weird scenes, like the TOW TRUCK DRIVER or that dude who had BUGS CRAWL out of his hair. Keanu Reeves was very at home in this role as a greasy dude with messed up hair. I give this movie a great review but you have to really be in the mood.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-31

ur1214854

title: This movie SCANNED my senses!! review: A SCANNER DARKLEY was amazing. I was impressed by the animation. Wynona Ryder was forgettable as always. However, I totally agree with other folks who have commented that this movie is like taking shrooms or other drugs and just hanging out with dudes tripping out. I liked it a lot. Some of the plot was hard to comprehend. I wanted to see A Prairie Home Companion but it was sold out. I am glad that I saw this. There were many weird scenes, like the TOW TRUCK DRIVER or that dude who had BUGS CRAWL out of his hair. Keanu Reeves was very at home in this role as a greasy dude with messed up hair. I give this movie a great review but you have to really be in the mood.

Possibly the Year's Best Film!

tt0405296

'A Scanner Darkly' produces one thought as the lights turn on; WOW! It is, put simply, a masterpiece. A masterpiece of writing, directing, acting and ultimately, film.In a world where 2 out of 10 people are recruited to spy on the other 8, Bob Arctor (Codename: Fred) is one of the 2 recruited. His latest job is to infiltrate a drug ring. This isn't just Dope or Coke or H it's a new more addictive drug called Substance D. Arctor manages to get hooked on the D and becomes dependent. This splits the two hemispheres of the brain causing Bob to forget his law man alter ego, Fred.This presents a problem. Eventually, Fred is assigned to spy or scan the house of... Bob Arctor. WHAT? How can they ask him to spy on himself. (Here's a hint, all agents have to wear scramble suits. Suits which take all characteristics, like looks and voice, and alter them. In physical characteristics, the suit rotates between different male and female looks.) This happens regularly, the novel tells us, just try to convince the boss you are not wrapped up in too much. The problem, the split brain hemispheres sometimes make Fred forget he's really Bob.Living with Bob are Barris and Luckman, a D dealer and D user. The chain of events also involves Donna a dealer and object of Bob's lust and Charles Freck, a addict feeling more than momentary insanity.'Scanner' is a marvel to look at. Using the technique of rotoscoping Linklater throws you into the middle of Substance D freak outs and the effect is jarring.The Supporting cast is wonderful with nods going to Downey Jr., Harrelson, Ryder and Cochrane. All present throughly convincing people through the animation. Reeves believe it or not is improving and is solid in this role. Especially when the third act take a darker turn (No bad pun intended.)In the end 'A Scanner Darkly' raises arguments for and against both sides of the war on drugs. Linklater makes all points brilliantly.With 'Waking Life' Linklater experimented with rotoscoping, with 'A Scanner Darkly', he perfects it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-66

ur4388114

title: Possibly the Year's Best Film! review: 'A Scanner Darkly' produces one thought as the lights turn on; WOW! It is, put simply, a masterpiece. A masterpiece of writing, directing, acting and ultimately, film.In a world where 2 out of 10 people are recruited to spy on the other 8, Bob Arctor (Codename: Fred) is one of the 2 recruited. His latest job is to infiltrate a drug ring. This isn't just Dope or Coke or H it's a new more addictive drug called Substance D. Arctor manages to get hooked on the D and becomes dependent. This splits the two hemispheres of the brain causing Bob to forget his law man alter ego, Fred.This presents a problem. Eventually, Fred is assigned to spy or scan the house of... Bob Arctor. WHAT? How can they ask him to spy on himself. (Here's a hint, all agents have to wear scramble suits. Suits which take all characteristics, like looks and voice, and alter them. In physical characteristics, the suit rotates between different male and female looks.) This happens regularly, the novel tells us, just try to convince the boss you are not wrapped up in too much. The problem, the split brain hemispheres sometimes make Fred forget he's really Bob.Living with Bob are Barris and Luckman, a D dealer and D user. The chain of events also involves Donna a dealer and object of Bob's lust and Charles Freck, a addict feeling more than momentary insanity.'Scanner' is a marvel to look at. Using the technique of rotoscoping Linklater throws you into the middle of Substance D freak outs and the effect is jarring.The Supporting cast is wonderful with nods going to Downey Jr., Harrelson, Ryder and Cochrane. All present throughly convincing people through the animation. Reeves believe it or not is improving and is solid in this role. Especially when the third act take a darker turn (No bad pun intended.)In the end 'A Scanner Darkly' raises arguments for and against both sides of the war on drugs. Linklater makes all points brilliantly.With 'Waking Life' Linklater experimented with rotoscoping, with 'A Scanner Darkly', he perfects it.

A different approach to the art of film-making and one that won't be forgotten quickly

tt0405296

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning Set in a futuristic society where a deadly new drug called Substance D has turned a large percentage of the population into mindless, soulless addicts. The Anti Drugs Agency sends Agent Bob Archer (Keanu Reeves) undercover to target users Ernie (Woody Harrelson) and James (Robert Downey Jr.) as without people like them, the dealers would have no market, so they are more important to target. Needless to say, he is soon being sucked into their pervasive little world, as the lines become blurred and things turn out not as they first seem.The name Phillip K Dick has come to enjoy a particular resonance in the world of science fiction, with credits including Blade Runner and Minority Report (which basically says it all.) And so he has his name attached to this inventive new approach to the genre, presenting a bleak, blurry vision of a drug addled future and some of the crazy inhabitants in it.While the approach is undeniably daring and the plot line translates well into film, the narrative flow doesn't, well, flow that well. But that's not too much of a problem as we're not really meant to be following a story as such, more staring into the directionless, vapid world of those hooked on a chronic substance, which the film shows very well.Performances wise, even being an animated cartoon can't make Reeves any more of a convincing actor, so, like always, we just have to grin and bear him. Downey Jr., on the other hand, is finely cast, as a guy who's always speaking snazzily and wildly which he must have drawn on some of his, ahem, life experience to play. Harrelson also has his history of drug crazed behaviour, so it would seem the casting directors were hiring those with an employment history of drug problems (if he'd been a bigger star then, maybe Russell Brand could have had a role), and his vapid, emotional waster is a good character.Not a typical Dick story, then. But, then, not a typical science fiction film, either. So, one you'll remember. ***

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405296/reviews-265

ur0345596

title: A different approach to the art of film-making and one that won't be forgotten quickly review: STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning Set in a futuristic society where a deadly new drug called Substance D has turned a large percentage of the population into mindless, soulless addicts. The Anti Drugs Agency sends Agent Bob Archer (Keanu Reeves) undercover to target users Ernie (Woody Harrelson) and James (Robert Downey Jr.) as without people like them, the dealers would have no market, so they are more important to target. Needless to say, he is soon being sucked into their pervasive little world, as the lines become blurred and things turn out not as they first seem.The name Phillip K Dick has come to enjoy a particular resonance in the world of science fiction, with credits including Blade Runner and Minority Report (which basically says it all.) And so he has his name attached to this inventive new approach to the genre, presenting a bleak, blurry vision of a drug addled future and some of the crazy inhabitants in it.While the approach is undeniably daring and the plot line translates well into film, the narrative flow doesn't, well, flow that well. But that's not too much of a problem as we're not really meant to be following a story as such, more staring into the directionless, vapid world of those hooked on a chronic substance, which the film shows very well.Performances wise, even being an animated cartoon can't make Reeves any more of a convincing actor, so, like always, we just have to grin and bear him. Downey Jr., on the other hand, is finely cast, as a guy who's always speaking snazzily and wildly which he must have drawn on some of his, ahem, life experience to play. Harrelson also has his history of drug crazed behaviour, so it would seem the casting directors were hiring those with an employment history of drug problems (if he'd been a bigger star then, maybe Russell Brand could have had a role), and his vapid, emotional waster is a good character.Not a typical Dick story, then. But, then, not a typical science fiction film, either. So, one you'll remember. ***

Sweaty Noir

tt0082089

In sweaty Florida (apparently before A/C was invented), a beautiful, rich woman has an affair with a lawyer and convinces him to kill her husband. The plot is somewhat muddled and does not hold up to close scrutiny, but the film makes up for it with marvelous atmosphere in the great film noir style of the 1940s. It is an impressive directorial debut for Kasdan, who also wrote the script. Turner sizzles in her film debut as a conniving femme fatale. Hurt's inherent blandness is well suited to the role of the somewhat dim-witted lawyer that Turner targets. Danson is terrific as a cynical prosecuting attorney. Barry's moody score is a big plus.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082089/reviews-135

ur2590596

title: Sweaty Noir review: In sweaty Florida (apparently before A/C was invented), a beautiful, rich woman has an affair with a lawyer and convinces him to kill her husband. The plot is somewhat muddled and does not hold up to close scrutiny, but the film makes up for it with marvelous atmosphere in the great film noir style of the 1940s. It is an impressive directorial debut for Kasdan, who also wrote the script. Turner sizzles in her film debut as a conniving femme fatale. Hurt's inherent blandness is well suited to the role of the somewhat dim-witted lawyer that Turner targets. Danson is terrific as a cynical prosecuting attorney. Barry's moody score is a big plus.

Man, this movie just oozes style.

tt0082089

As neo-noirs go, "Body Heat" stands right up there with the greats. And despite its ultra-sweaty setting, it still manages to maintain an ultra- cool style. All of the pieces in this puzzle fit just so perfectly. William Hurt plays a great patsy, completely in over his head; Kathleen Turner is pitch perfect as the femme fatale (she's got that "bad news" written all over her . . . and that voice!). And between that sweet '80s sax score (like a soap opera "Chinatown") and the incredible tone and setting Lawrence Kasdan kicks off from the get-go, you can just feel the steam coming off of the screen. The plot is twisty enough, but that yearbook scene at the end was one helluva capper. Great movie. 8/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082089/reviews-165

ur1994077

title: Man, this movie just oozes style. review: As neo-noirs go, "Body Heat" stands right up there with the greats. And despite its ultra-sweaty setting, it still manages to maintain an ultra- cool style. All of the pieces in this puzzle fit just so perfectly. William Hurt plays a great patsy, completely in over his head; Kathleen Turner is pitch perfect as the femme fatale (she's got that "bad news" written all over her . . . and that voice!). And between that sweet '80s sax score (like a soap opera "Chinatown") and the incredible tone and setting Lawrence Kasdan kicks off from the get-go, you can just feel the steam coming off of the screen. The plot is twisty enough, but that yearbook scene at the end was one helluva capper. Great movie. 8/10

Classy Erotic Noir

tt0082089

During a searing heatwave, Ned Racine(William Hurt) a none to bright Floridian lawyer with an eye for the ladies meets up with and seduces a married woman Matty Walker(Kathleen Turner) and after a torrid affair they are soon plotting to kill her husband (Richard Crenna)so that she can inherit his wealth and be free.Of course all is not what it seems in this neo-noir, the plot obviously takes a nod towards its eminent predecessors Double Indemnity and A Postman always rings twice, but it is more than a mere remake and Kasdan has added his own original spin on the story and made it his own. Body Heat is full of the witty dialogue you might expect in a JM Cain script and all the twists of an 1980's erotic thriller and an excellent sexual tension is developed between the leads both of whom excel in their respective performances .A must see for all Noir fans.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082089/reviews-107

ur2630196

title: Classy Erotic Noir review: During a searing heatwave, Ned Racine(William Hurt) a none to bright Floridian lawyer with an eye for the ladies meets up with and seduces a married woman Matty Walker(Kathleen Turner) and after a torrid affair they are soon plotting to kill her husband (Richard Crenna)so that she can inherit his wealth and be free.Of course all is not what it seems in this neo-noir, the plot obviously takes a nod towards its eminent predecessors Double Indemnity and A Postman always rings twice, but it is more than a mere remake and Kasdan has added his own original spin on the story and made it his own. Body Heat is full of the witty dialogue you might expect in a JM Cain script and all the twists of an 1980's erotic thriller and an excellent sexual tension is developed between the leads both of whom excel in their respective performances .A must see for all Noir fans.

Overheated

tt0082089

I've seen this movie before. Except the first time I saw the movie it was called Double Indemnity. And it was a lot better. Writer/director Lawrence Kasdan makes no attempt to hide the fact that he's basically just doing Double Indemnity all over again. He took that movie, sexed it up a bit, added a few twists and ended up with a movie not nearly as good as the one that inspired him. Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery but Body Heat flatters to deceive. It's an imitation alright but a rather pale one.If you've seen Double Indemnity you already know the plot of Body Heat. There's a woman who wants to kill her husband for his money and there's the poor sap who falls under the woman's seductive spell and finds himself up to his neck in a murder plot. Whereas Double Indemnity made it very clear that it was the woman who hatched the murderous plot Body Heat is a little more vague. Maybe this time it's the woman's new lover who first gets the idea for murder and she's just willing to go along for the ride. This opens up some different possibilities, allowing the movie to retain an air of mystery and to set up some twists and turns at the end. But by the time all is finally revealed it's too late to save this movie. With it having been such a plodding, monotonous journey, and the main characters having so little personality, by the end you probably won't care how it ends. You'll just be glad that it's finally ending.Kathleen Turner plays our mysterious seductress, Matty Walker, and she certainly brings plenty of heat to the role, steaming up the screen in a way her Double Indemnity counterpart Barbara Stanwyck never would have been allowed to back in 1944. But steaminess aside Turner otherwise pales in comparison to Stanwyck. For whatever mystery there may be around her Matty Walker the character has very little life to her. Turner is dry and bland, delivering her lines in snooze-inducing monotone. Her co-star William Hurt comes across no better with his portrayal of sleazy lawyer Ned Racine, Matty's new lover and would-be murder accomplice. Hurt has about as much charisma as a doorknob and the movie never even attempts to justify why Ned is willing to murder for this woman he just met. She can't be THAT good in bed. The plot meanders about with the sense that the movie's just killing time until it finally gets around to killing the husband. Another problem is the movie's score which is loud, obtrusive and obnoxious. Never a quiet moment to let the movie breathe. Then again if your ears weren't constantly being assaulted by the music you might notice that nothing is going on and the director wouldn't want that. In the end there are some rather contrived twists as the movie tries to piece its plot together. There's also Ted Danson, playing a prosecutor, doing a little tap-dance before he tells his friend he suspects him of murder. At that point it becomes rather impossible to take the movie seriously. Kasdan took a classic movie and tried to heat it up. But he overcooked it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082089/reviews-146

ur0915482

title: Overheated review: I've seen this movie before. Except the first time I saw the movie it was called Double Indemnity. And it was a lot better. Writer/director Lawrence Kasdan makes no attempt to hide the fact that he's basically just doing Double Indemnity all over again. He took that movie, sexed it up a bit, added a few twists and ended up with a movie not nearly as good as the one that inspired him. Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery but Body Heat flatters to deceive. It's an imitation alright but a rather pale one.If you've seen Double Indemnity you already know the plot of Body Heat. There's a woman who wants to kill her husband for his money and there's the poor sap who falls under the woman's seductive spell and finds himself up to his neck in a murder plot. Whereas Double Indemnity made it very clear that it was the woman who hatched the murderous plot Body Heat is a little more vague. Maybe this time it's the woman's new lover who first gets the idea for murder and she's just willing to go along for the ride. This opens up some different possibilities, allowing the movie to retain an air of mystery and to set up some twists and turns at the end. But by the time all is finally revealed it's too late to save this movie. With it having been such a plodding, monotonous journey, and the main characters having so little personality, by the end you probably won't care how it ends. You'll just be glad that it's finally ending.Kathleen Turner plays our mysterious seductress, Matty Walker, and she certainly brings plenty of heat to the role, steaming up the screen in a way her Double Indemnity counterpart Barbara Stanwyck never would have been allowed to back in 1944. But steaminess aside Turner otherwise pales in comparison to Stanwyck. For whatever mystery there may be around her Matty Walker the character has very little life to her. Turner is dry and bland, delivering her lines in snooze-inducing monotone. Her co-star William Hurt comes across no better with his portrayal of sleazy lawyer Ned Racine, Matty's new lover and would-be murder accomplice. Hurt has about as much charisma as a doorknob and the movie never even attempts to justify why Ned is willing to murder for this woman he just met. She can't be THAT good in bed. The plot meanders about with the sense that the movie's just killing time until it finally gets around to killing the husband. Another problem is the movie's score which is loud, obtrusive and obnoxious. Never a quiet moment to let the movie breathe. Then again if your ears weren't constantly being assaulted by the music you might notice that nothing is going on and the director wouldn't want that. In the end there are some rather contrived twists as the movie tries to piece its plot together. There's also Ted Danson, playing a prosecutor, doing a little tap-dance before he tells his friend he suspects him of murder. At that point it becomes rather impossible to take the movie seriously. Kasdan took a classic movie and tried to heat it up. But he overcooked it.

Absolutely engrossing, in a sweaty kind of way

tt0082089

Body Heat is a resurrection of the film noir genre, which has been on some kind of back burner since the 1940s or so. This is one of the more distinct film genres, even more so than such genres as comedy or action or horror, which all have a tendency to blend into one another to some extent. Films noir are extremely characteristic pieces of filmmaking with a very rigid set of distinguishing elements, but it is a genre that has largely been left behind in the era of gangster movies before they were made into a joke by later spoofs like Dick Tracy, which is why it is sort of surprising to see the genre brought back to life so effectively by a movie like Body Heat. It's good to know that even genres that have seemingly been left behind still have some life left in them for great films. Body Heat is widely compared to one of the original, and still one of the best, films noir ever made, Double Indemnity. As is often the case in films noir, Body Heat tells the story of a very effectively portrayed romance gone horribly wrong. William Hurt and Kathleen Turner work amazingly well onscreen, and the cloyingly hot and muggy atmosphere takes a welcome turn from the typical wet streets of classic noir films and makes it work spectacularly well in enhancing the tension of the film.I've noticed that some other reviewers recommend watching Double Indemnity before viewing Body Heat, but I don't think the order matters as long as you see both at some point. Body Heat is a tremendously effective film made by the capable Lawrence Kasdan, and it borrows heavily from its 1944 counterpart. Both films are more than capable of standing on their own, but they have a complementary relationship that enhances both films without belittling one or the other. Mickey Rourke delivers an early performance as the surprisingly effective arsonist, but the real surprise in this film is Ted Danson, whose performance as Peter Lowenstein just about steals the whole movie. He is a perfect, if rather ham-handed, example of a three-dimensional character, in that he has this interest in dancing that is not linked to anything that happens in the film except to make him a more interesting character, and his performance, I will admit, far surpasses anything of which I had previously thought Mr. Danson capable. Bravo.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082089/reviews-43

ur0562732

title: Absolutely engrossing, in a sweaty kind of way review: Body Heat is a resurrection of the film noir genre, which has been on some kind of back burner since the 1940s or so. This is one of the more distinct film genres, even more so than such genres as comedy or action or horror, which all have a tendency to blend into one another to some extent. Films noir are extremely characteristic pieces of filmmaking with a very rigid set of distinguishing elements, but it is a genre that has largely been left behind in the era of gangster movies before they were made into a joke by later spoofs like Dick Tracy, which is why it is sort of surprising to see the genre brought back to life so effectively by a movie like Body Heat. It's good to know that even genres that have seemingly been left behind still have some life left in them for great films. Body Heat is widely compared to one of the original, and still one of the best, films noir ever made, Double Indemnity. As is often the case in films noir, Body Heat tells the story of a very effectively portrayed romance gone horribly wrong. William Hurt and Kathleen Turner work amazingly well onscreen, and the cloyingly hot and muggy atmosphere takes a welcome turn from the typical wet streets of classic noir films and makes it work spectacularly well in enhancing the tension of the film.I've noticed that some other reviewers recommend watching Double Indemnity before viewing Body Heat, but I don't think the order matters as long as you see both at some point. Body Heat is a tremendously effective film made by the capable Lawrence Kasdan, and it borrows heavily from its 1944 counterpart. Both films are more than capable of standing on their own, but they have a complementary relationship that enhances both films without belittling one or the other. Mickey Rourke delivers an early performance as the surprisingly effective arsonist, but the real surprise in this film is Ted Danson, whose performance as Peter Lowenstein just about steals the whole movie. He is a perfect, if rather ham-handed, example of a three-dimensional character, in that he has this interest in dancing that is not linked to anything that happens in the film except to make him a more interesting character, and his performance, I will admit, far surpasses anything of which I had previously thought Mr. Danson capable. Bravo.

One of the best thrillers

tt0082089

Many people complain that nowadays movies are full of pornography and nude scenes, as if it wasn't showed in the past. "Body Heat" proves that you can have sensual scenes in a serious thriller, and it does not spoil it's atmosphere. The main story used in this picture was quite original back when released, since nowadays people from all over the world do that, just to get some money-- as if money is more important than people themselves. All the cast is completely professional, there isn't a single scene that I could say they were acting. Maybe acting in the eighties was much better and I just noticed. Don't expect this movie to be scary-- the only freak scene is when William Hurt puts on a mask in front of the beach and looks like Freddy Krueger. Be prepared to see a movie full of twists and mysterious moments. Also, while watching this you will imagine how hard it is to deny something you know you did when everyone is questioning you-- I surely wouldn't take it, I would confess from the get go haha. Maybe I'm too outspoken for that. All in all, this is one of the greatest thrillers I've ever seen, don't hesitate!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082089/reviews-155

ur16558990

title: One of the best thrillers review: Many people complain that nowadays movies are full of pornography and nude scenes, as if it wasn't showed in the past. "Body Heat" proves that you can have sensual scenes in a serious thriller, and it does not spoil it's atmosphere. The main story used in this picture was quite original back when released, since nowadays people from all over the world do that, just to get some money-- as if money is more important than people themselves. All the cast is completely professional, there isn't a single scene that I could say they were acting. Maybe acting in the eighties was much better and I just noticed. Don't expect this movie to be scary-- the only freak scene is when William Hurt puts on a mask in front of the beach and looks like Freddy Krueger. Be prepared to see a movie full of twists and mysterious moments. Also, while watching this you will imagine how hard it is to deny something you know you did when everyone is questioning you-- I surely wouldn't take it, I would confess from the get go haha. Maybe I'm too outspoken for that. All in all, this is one of the greatest thrillers I've ever seen, don't hesitate!

A slick, sexy homage to classic noir movies - 87%

tt0082089

Noir is the new black. Since the end of the Fifties, Hollywood has never really recaptured that style of film-making where the guys are packing heat, the dames are just as deadly and the cigarette smoke hangs heavily in the air of rain-sodden streets and dimly lit alleys. Noir films offer an appealing mix of sex, glamour and danger and few films since the Fifties have got it right but thankfully, this is an exception. It may be a knowing homage bordering on parody at times but this remains a real gem of a movie, illuminated by a truly brilliant performance from a then-debuting actress.Sleazy small-town lawyer Ned Racine (William Hurt) struggles to cope during a Florida heatwave along with his partner Peter Lowenstein (Ted Danson). But Ned is helpless when he spots the sultry Matty Walker (Kathleen Turner) who, despite being married, doesn't exactly put up much of a fight when they begin a torrid affair. As Ned and Matty spend their nights together, they hatch a plot to get rid of Matty's husband Edmund (Richard Crenna) but will they go through with it, especially as Peter's suspicions begin to grow? I can think of few films that convince as well as "Body Heat". Everything from the acting to the setting is absolutely top-notch, led by the frankly superb Hurt and Turner. Turner instantly places herself in the Hall of Fame of femme fatales as Matty, as beguiling and bewitching as any of the classics. But our star-crossed lovers are ably supported by the rest of the cast like Danson and a young Mickey Rourke who pops up in a couple of critical scenes. Crenna, who is hardly in the film at all, still manages to provide a memorable performance despite being saddled with fairly dodgy dialogue. The film does feel like its trying too hard to be a Raymond Chandler novel, filled as it is with lines that you'd never hear in real life. It's unashamedly theatrical but it still works. Think of it as Tarantinoesque - it ticks all the genre clichés but isn't weakened because of it. It's reminiscent of other films and somehow, by basking in their glory, it makes "Body Heat" even better.What makes "Body Heat" really work is that even without trying to be a classic noir film, it remains a thoroughly enjoyable thriller that laid the template for the likes of "Basic Instinct", "Body Of Evidence" and others. For me, this bridges the gap between the likes of "Double Indemnity" and "The Big Sleep" and more modern films like those I've mentioned. This is a sexy, sultry, steamy thriller that revels in its influences while offering a classic morality tale about the dangers of getting what you want. It's just a shame Turner's career never really matched the magnificence of her debut although if you ever wondered where Jessica Rabbit started out, this is your first port of call...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082089/reviews-148

ur3035115

title: A slick, sexy homage to classic noir movies - 87% review: Noir is the new black. Since the end of the Fifties, Hollywood has never really recaptured that style of film-making where the guys are packing heat, the dames are just as deadly and the cigarette smoke hangs heavily in the air of rain-sodden streets and dimly lit alleys. Noir films offer an appealing mix of sex, glamour and danger and few films since the Fifties have got it right but thankfully, this is an exception. It may be a knowing homage bordering on parody at times but this remains a real gem of a movie, illuminated by a truly brilliant performance from a then-debuting actress.Sleazy small-town lawyer Ned Racine (William Hurt) struggles to cope during a Florida heatwave along with his partner Peter Lowenstein (Ted Danson). But Ned is helpless when he spots the sultry Matty Walker (Kathleen Turner) who, despite being married, doesn't exactly put up much of a fight when they begin a torrid affair. As Ned and Matty spend their nights together, they hatch a plot to get rid of Matty's husband Edmund (Richard Crenna) but will they go through with it, especially as Peter's suspicions begin to grow? I can think of few films that convince as well as "Body Heat". Everything from the acting to the setting is absolutely top-notch, led by the frankly superb Hurt and Turner. Turner instantly places herself in the Hall of Fame of femme fatales as Matty, as beguiling and bewitching as any of the classics. But our star-crossed lovers are ably supported by the rest of the cast like Danson and a young Mickey Rourke who pops up in a couple of critical scenes. Crenna, who is hardly in the film at all, still manages to provide a memorable performance despite being saddled with fairly dodgy dialogue. The film does feel like its trying too hard to be a Raymond Chandler novel, filled as it is with lines that you'd never hear in real life. It's unashamedly theatrical but it still works. Think of it as Tarantinoesque - it ticks all the genre clichés but isn't weakened because of it. It's reminiscent of other films and somehow, by basking in their glory, it makes "Body Heat" even better.What makes "Body Heat" really work is that even without trying to be a classic noir film, it remains a thoroughly enjoyable thriller that laid the template for the likes of "Basic Instinct", "Body Of Evidence" and others. For me, this bridges the gap between the likes of "Double Indemnity" and "The Big Sleep" and more modern films like those I've mentioned. This is a sexy, sultry, steamy thriller that revels in its influences while offering a classic morality tale about the dangers of getting what you want. It's just a shame Turner's career never really matched the magnificence of her debut although if you ever wondered where Jessica Rabbit started out, this is your first port of call...

Entertaining, sexy film noir

tt0082089

Body Heat doesn't have enough to distinguish itself to be called a classic, but it aged well enough to still be enjoyable and entertaining, which is an achievement that many of the fellow semi-erotic thrillers of the period can't boast. While it was released in 1981, it would be misleading to call it neo-noir; Body Heat is 100% classic film noir, and rather than deconstructing and referencing the genre, it adheres to each of its rules to a tee. In fact, it could have easily been made in the 50's - with the one exception of the nudity and steamy sex scenes, that place it firmly in 80's Hollywood. Naturally, nude scenes of Kathleen Turner do no harm to the film's entertainment value.Body Heat is classy and elegant; the cinematography and especially the acting are good enough that even the sex doesn't feel forced and exploitative. Turner is fantastic, and William Hurt delivers too; Mickey Rourke and Ted Danson are both surprisingly good in smaller but memorable parts. It's hard to avoid a feeling of missed potential, though. The film takes itself much too seriously; a couple of moments almost feel like jab at the staples of film noir (like Danson's "No, I don't need my own. I'll just breathe the air" when everybody in the room lights up") but it's hard to tell if that's ever intentional. My biggest disappointment was with the under-use of the heat motif, which was built up as a driving force of the story in the beginning but wasn't developed in any meaningful way later on. Compare and contrast Do The Right Thing, also set during a heat wave to powerful and intense results. Like everything about Body Heat, it feels right and adds to the atmosphere, but refuses to go all the way.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082089/reviews-147

ur5358902

title: Entertaining, sexy film noir review: Body Heat doesn't have enough to distinguish itself to be called a classic, but it aged well enough to still be enjoyable and entertaining, which is an achievement that many of the fellow semi-erotic thrillers of the period can't boast. While it was released in 1981, it would be misleading to call it neo-noir; Body Heat is 100% classic film noir, and rather than deconstructing and referencing the genre, it adheres to each of its rules to a tee. In fact, it could have easily been made in the 50's - with the one exception of the nudity and steamy sex scenes, that place it firmly in 80's Hollywood. Naturally, nude scenes of Kathleen Turner do no harm to the film's entertainment value.Body Heat is classy and elegant; the cinematography and especially the acting are good enough that even the sex doesn't feel forced and exploitative. Turner is fantastic, and William Hurt delivers too; Mickey Rourke and Ted Danson are both surprisingly good in smaller but memorable parts. It's hard to avoid a feeling of missed potential, though. The film takes itself much too seriously; a couple of moments almost feel like jab at the staples of film noir (like Danson's "No, I don't need my own. I'll just breathe the air" when everybody in the room lights up") but it's hard to tell if that's ever intentional. My biggest disappointment was with the under-use of the heat motif, which was built up as a driving force of the story in the beginning but wasn't developed in any meaningful way later on. Compare and contrast Do The Right Thing, also set during a heat wave to powerful and intense results. Like everything about Body Heat, it feels right and adds to the atmosphere, but refuses to go all the way.

humid suspense

tt0082089

Wow! You've NEVER seen anything like "Body Heat"! Seriously, this is one move that's bound to grow on you. William Hurt plays an incompetent lawyer who befriends sultry Kathleen Turner, and the two of them scheme to get rid of her rich husband (Richard Crenna). The movie's setting is absolutely perfect. It's in Florida amid a heat wave, and everyone is constantly sweating. Of course, this steaminess (in multiple senses) only adds to the chemistry between Hurt and Turner. To be certain, Kathleen Turner looks like a cross between Grace Kelly and Elizabeth Montgomery (could there be a sexier combo?).Obviously, the movie is intended as a tribute to film noir, and it certainly succeeds. Of course, cinema from the old days wasn't allowed to show what "Body Heat" does. I dare you not to feel sexually aroused while watching it. Lawrence Kasdan made a fine directorial debut here, and went on to cast Hurt in "The Big Chill" and "I Love You to Death". It's a perfect movie in every way.Also starring Ted Danson, Kim Zimmer and A.J. Preston.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082089/reviews-150

ur4888011

title: humid suspense review: Wow! You've NEVER seen anything like "Body Heat"! Seriously, this is one move that's bound to grow on you. William Hurt plays an incompetent lawyer who befriends sultry Kathleen Turner, and the two of them scheme to get rid of her rich husband (Richard Crenna). The movie's setting is absolutely perfect. It's in Florida amid a heat wave, and everyone is constantly sweating. Of course, this steaminess (in multiple senses) only adds to the chemistry between Hurt and Turner. To be certain, Kathleen Turner looks like a cross between Grace Kelly and Elizabeth Montgomery (could there be a sexier combo?).Obviously, the movie is intended as a tribute to film noir, and it certainly succeeds. Of course, cinema from the old days wasn't allowed to show what "Body Heat" does. I dare you not to feel sexually aroused while watching it. Lawrence Kasdan made a fine directorial debut here, and went on to cast Hurt in "The Big Chill" and "I Love You to Death". It's a perfect movie in every way.Also starring Ted Danson, Kim Zimmer and A.J. Preston.

Oh, are you fo' real?

tt0322589

I got a three pack on a DVD at Wal Mart for ten dollars a few weeks ago and Honey was on the cover, never saw the movie, wasn't really interested when it came out, but I figured why not see it for ten dollars? Sounds silly, but who knows? Sometimes you find little treasures here and there that are cheap, plus, I remember that this was the film that really introduced Jessica Alba to the movie business industry. Of course, she's really huge now, and judging from this film, Honey that I watched last night, I have to say other than her looks, I am surprised she made it this far. I don't mean to sound horrible on the film or anything, but this just seemed like a giant rap video for me and the plot was way too average and predictable with some cheesy street slang.Honey Daniels has three jobs: a bartender, a sales girl at a CD store, and also a dance teacher at her mom's little business to keep kids off the street. But more than anything, Honey wants to be a music video back up dancer. Her wishes come true when a director, Michael, welcomes her to the dance floor and makes her a choreographer. All her dreams are coming true, until she realizes that she forgets the more important things in life that mean so much to her. She eventually wants to open a club of her own to help out the neighborhood kids.Honey has the typical street slang which I didn't find attractive, you just can't take it seriously. Alba, she's such a pretty girl, BUT, I'm very sorry, the girl cannot act, I didn't feel an ounce of sympathy or compassion for her character, she played off as this naive little thing, when she could have played it more smart and strong. Not to mention what was the whole Missy Elliot dialog? "What is this? This? This? Ugh? Ugh?"... it was supposed to be funny, but Missy comes off flat. Mekhi should have had more screen time, the guy is the only one with talent in the film. The dance moves are good, but I just wish they wouldn't have made this into a giant rap video.2/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0322589/reviews-144

ur1293485

title: Oh, are you fo' real? review: I got a three pack on a DVD at Wal Mart for ten dollars a few weeks ago and Honey was on the cover, never saw the movie, wasn't really interested when it came out, but I figured why not see it for ten dollars? Sounds silly, but who knows? Sometimes you find little treasures here and there that are cheap, plus, I remember that this was the film that really introduced Jessica Alba to the movie business industry. Of course, she's really huge now, and judging from this film, Honey that I watched last night, I have to say other than her looks, I am surprised she made it this far. I don't mean to sound horrible on the film or anything, but this just seemed like a giant rap video for me and the plot was way too average and predictable with some cheesy street slang.Honey Daniels has three jobs: a bartender, a sales girl at a CD store, and also a dance teacher at her mom's little business to keep kids off the street. But more than anything, Honey wants to be a music video back up dancer. Her wishes come true when a director, Michael, welcomes her to the dance floor and makes her a choreographer. All her dreams are coming true, until she realizes that she forgets the more important things in life that mean so much to her. She eventually wants to open a club of her own to help out the neighborhood kids.Honey has the typical street slang which I didn't find attractive, you just can't take it seriously. Alba, she's such a pretty girl, BUT, I'm very sorry, the girl cannot act, I didn't feel an ounce of sympathy or compassion for her character, she played off as this naive little thing, when she could have played it more smart and strong. Not to mention what was the whole Missy Elliot dialog? "What is this? This? This? Ugh? Ugh?"... it was supposed to be funny, but Missy comes off flat. Mekhi should have had more screen time, the guy is the only one with talent in the film. The dance moves are good, but I just wish they wouldn't have made this into a giant rap video.2/10

A 5 for Alba

tt0322589

Jessica Alba is Honey, a bartender and dancer, a deadly combination, much like Jennifer Beal's welder/artist in the wonderful masterpiece Flashdance. The stupidity is on par with the struggles encountered by another girl battling the forces against her dreams of success against all odds.Honey's goal in life is to star in music videos; oh what ambition. A local community center is in shambles and needs a complete overhaul, so our savior will come to the rescue and boy can she multi task. Honey opens a dance studio for the kiddies and arranges a benefit concert to raise money to rebuild the center. This movie belongs on the lifetime channel and the only reason I'm giving it a five is for Jessica Alba's awesome body.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0322589/reviews-156

ur14295241

title: A 5 for Alba review: Jessica Alba is Honey, a bartender and dancer, a deadly combination, much like Jennifer Beal's welder/artist in the wonderful masterpiece Flashdance. The stupidity is on par with the struggles encountered by another girl battling the forces against her dreams of success against all odds.Honey's goal in life is to star in music videos; oh what ambition. A local community center is in shambles and needs a complete overhaul, so our savior will come to the rescue and boy can she multi task. Honey opens a dance studio for the kiddies and arranges a benefit concert to raise money to rebuild the center. This movie belongs on the lifetime channel and the only reason I'm giving it a five is for Jessica Alba's awesome body.

The star of the show

tt0322589

Jessica Alba is the star of the show; in this movie and in Hollywood since I don't know when. Her situation is something to detail about. Personally, I look at her and I think she has acted her whole life. Everyone talks about her everyday as if she had decades in the business, but she doesn't. I could say I believe she's done over ten films, when this movie was probably her fifth important role. She did a TV show I never saw for two years, but even before that, her name was on the poster of the movies she appeared in. She is a star by nature, a leading star; and "Honey" is the evidence that proves my statement. When the film starts, Honey Daniels (Alba) is working at the bar in a disco serving the usual free drinks to her best friend Gina (Joy Briant): "One, please", the friend says, and two guys standing right by her get closer: "Make that three". Honey, with a big smile in her face, tells the guys: "Today is your lucky day", and then Gina interrupts: "Don't get to excited though; she'll not be here much longer…She's gonna make it". So the guys ask how she's gonna make it.Right away we find out Honey dances; and that she dances awesomely well. If Alba did her own dance moves I don't know for sure, but it always looks like her; in the dance floor, in the videos, in the dance lessons. OK, the film: Honey has a great talent for dancing and she could be a classic ballerina but she prefers to teach hip-hop in a place her mother owns. She goes to auditions, she works hard, and she ultimately gets recognized.But Alonzo Brown and Kim Watson's story is not about "making it"; it is about the good-hearted people who fight for what they want, don't sell and don't quit. I don't even know if this is a veridical portrait of the hip hop world, but the video shoots seem real and I guess the artists/directors relationships should be how the movie shows them. What I wanted to say is that in the music world, mostly with hip hop (which I consider the easiest market today), when people make it, it goes over their heads, and they leave everything behind.Although not Honey Daniels; she'll not fall into temptation, and she'll be there for the ones she cares for. It may sound too formulaic, but it's beautiful. Debutant director at the time Bille Woodruff, with previous experience from musical videos, shows us the nice face of his characters' world. Everything is shiny, everyone's happy, everyone's smiling. Yeah, sure some bad things happen, but everything will be ultimately worked out.Great casting work with the youngsters, especially with Zachary Williams as a little boy, Raymond, who needs someone to watch over him; and Lil' Romeo in a tremendous and talented performance as the teenager Benny, who debates himself about being a gangster or a normal child. This plus Missy Elliott's cameo and Mekhi Phifer in the most charming performance of his career, and the some of the best lines as: "You peoples? Playa, playa, how'd you swing that? I've been trying' to be her peoples for weeks; ain't had no luck". Not enough? Alba looks gorgeously beautiful in every outfit she wears and her acting skills are way above the film's requirements…She's stunning now and it is only the beginning.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0322589/reviews-109

ur4751428

title: The star of the show review: Jessica Alba is the star of the show; in this movie and in Hollywood since I don't know when. Her situation is something to detail about. Personally, I look at her and I think she has acted her whole life. Everyone talks about her everyday as if she had decades in the business, but she doesn't. I could say I believe she's done over ten films, when this movie was probably her fifth important role. She did a TV show I never saw for two years, but even before that, her name was on the poster of the movies she appeared in. She is a star by nature, a leading star; and "Honey" is the evidence that proves my statement. When the film starts, Honey Daniels (Alba) is working at the bar in a disco serving the usual free drinks to her best friend Gina (Joy Briant): "One, please", the friend says, and two guys standing right by her get closer: "Make that three". Honey, with a big smile in her face, tells the guys: "Today is your lucky day", and then Gina interrupts: "Don't get to excited though; she'll not be here much longer…She's gonna make it". So the guys ask how she's gonna make it.Right away we find out Honey dances; and that she dances awesomely well. If Alba did her own dance moves I don't know for sure, but it always looks like her; in the dance floor, in the videos, in the dance lessons. OK, the film: Honey has a great talent for dancing and she could be a classic ballerina but she prefers to teach hip-hop in a place her mother owns. She goes to auditions, she works hard, and she ultimately gets recognized.But Alonzo Brown and Kim Watson's story is not about "making it"; it is about the good-hearted people who fight for what they want, don't sell and don't quit. I don't even know if this is a veridical portrait of the hip hop world, but the video shoots seem real and I guess the artists/directors relationships should be how the movie shows them. What I wanted to say is that in the music world, mostly with hip hop (which I consider the easiest market today), when people make it, it goes over their heads, and they leave everything behind.Although not Honey Daniels; she'll not fall into temptation, and she'll be there for the ones she cares for. It may sound too formulaic, but it's beautiful. Debutant director at the time Bille Woodruff, with previous experience from musical videos, shows us the nice face of his characters' world. Everything is shiny, everyone's happy, everyone's smiling. Yeah, sure some bad things happen, but everything will be ultimately worked out.Great casting work with the youngsters, especially with Zachary Williams as a little boy, Raymond, who needs someone to watch over him; and Lil' Romeo in a tremendous and talented performance as the teenager Benny, who debates himself about being a gangster or a normal child. This plus Missy Elliott's cameo and Mekhi Phifer in the most charming performance of his career, and the some of the best lines as: "You peoples? Playa, playa, how'd you swing that? I've been trying' to be her peoples for weeks; ain't had no luck". Not enough? Alba looks gorgeously beautiful in every outfit she wears and her acting skills are way above the film's requirements…She's stunning now and it is only the beginning.

An incredibly fun movie; just let yourself go

tt0322589

I don't understand all the hate for Jessica Alba, and the hate for this film. Mostly, any film with her in it besides Sin City get a bad rep and she has won and been nominated for quite a few Razzies over the years, including the performance for this film. I, personally, find that overly inane and uncalled for. Anyway, on to the movie itself. Honey is a film that you just can't take seriously. It contains lots of bad dialogue, not that great of choreography in certain parts, per se, and quite a bit of the characters just fill up the time. Besides all that, I find myself having such a good heart-felt time with it, every time I watch it.Honey is a feel good pleasure driver. It's about showing that dreams can come true for all sorts of people, and there are so many scenes that put a smile on my face because of just how true to having fun it is. Unlike others, that I stated earlier, I thought Jessica Alba surpassed in her performance as Honey. She's sweet, she's sexy and she is the only truly likable character, but there is enough presence there for you to love her entirely, and I do. She hits dance moves that aren't that difficult to where they look like she has practice them for weeks. She's selfless, and Jessica Alba has more of a way of acting with her face and body rather than she does her voice and line delivery; that of course works perfectly for this movie.I don't honestly find many faults with this movie, aside from the dialogue and how all the characters are just kind of there. I find the story very warming and endearing, and the upsides of this movie outweigh the bad for me honestly, by far. Like I said, it's a blast from beginning to end. Great songs, nice cameos; if Missy Elliott's 10 minutes of the screen don't put a smile on your face I don't know what will, and I root for Honey, all the way through. I want this woman to succeed, I want her goals and dreams to be accomplished, and if Jessica Alba can do that for her character and for me, this film has acquired it's main goal, of entertaining with a likable lead. To each their own, I love Honey.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0322589/reviews-145

ur18374320

title: An incredibly fun movie; just let yourself go review: I don't understand all the hate for Jessica Alba, and the hate for this film. Mostly, any film with her in it besides Sin City get a bad rep and she has won and been nominated for quite a few Razzies over the years, including the performance for this film. I, personally, find that overly inane and uncalled for. Anyway, on to the movie itself. Honey is a film that you just can't take seriously. It contains lots of bad dialogue, not that great of choreography in certain parts, per se, and quite a bit of the characters just fill up the time. Besides all that, I find myself having such a good heart-felt time with it, every time I watch it.Honey is a feel good pleasure driver. It's about showing that dreams can come true for all sorts of people, and there are so many scenes that put a smile on my face because of just how true to having fun it is. Unlike others, that I stated earlier, I thought Jessica Alba surpassed in her performance as Honey. She's sweet, she's sexy and she is the only truly likable character, but there is enough presence there for you to love her entirely, and I do. She hits dance moves that aren't that difficult to where they look like she has practice them for weeks. She's selfless, and Jessica Alba has more of a way of acting with her face and body rather than she does her voice and line delivery; that of course works perfectly for this movie.I don't honestly find many faults with this movie, aside from the dialogue and how all the characters are just kind of there. I find the story very warming and endearing, and the upsides of this movie outweigh the bad for me honestly, by far. Like I said, it's a blast from beginning to end. Great songs, nice cameos; if Missy Elliott's 10 minutes of the screen don't put a smile on your face I don't know what will, and I root for Honey, all the way through. I want this woman to succeed, I want her goals and dreams to be accomplished, and if Jessica Alba can do that for her character and for me, this film has acquired it's main goal, of entertaining with a likable lead. To each their own, I love Honey.

"Honey" is sweet, but is otherwise empty. 6/10

tt0322589

I typically try to stay away from movies like "Honey" because they appeal to such a limited audience. It's basically music video flash and glitter - the "Flashdance" of the 21st century, made for a braindead audience raised on MTV. I was raised on MTV unfortunately, so naturally I fit into this film's demographic, which is why I did like this movie, though it faded from memory very quickly after viewing it. Jessica Alba is sweet, to say the least, and she truly comes alive as Honey Daniels, who dreams of being a music video choreographer. She storms the dance floor in the local club and eventually gains the attention of a prominent music video director who wants her to work with him on his projects. Of course, this puts a strain on the life she already has with her friends and family, as well as her commitment as a dance teacher at the local community center.This movie resembles "Flashdance" in a lot of ways that are too numerous to mention, but that did not stop me from liking "Honey." Jessica Alba gives a great performance and I'm probably sure it was her that kept the movie from going off the tracks. Unfortunately though, it is her and only her, plus a few exciting dance sequences that really make this movie memorable. That is why I rated it a "6." Nonetheless, this movie is good for a Saturday night with some friends if you have nothing else to do.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0322589/reviews-61

ur0892646

title: "Honey" is sweet, but is otherwise empty. 6/10 review: I typically try to stay away from movies like "Honey" because they appeal to such a limited audience. It's basically music video flash and glitter - the "Flashdance" of the 21st century, made for a braindead audience raised on MTV. I was raised on MTV unfortunately, so naturally I fit into this film's demographic, which is why I did like this movie, though it faded from memory very quickly after viewing it. Jessica Alba is sweet, to say the least, and she truly comes alive as Honey Daniels, who dreams of being a music video choreographer. She storms the dance floor in the local club and eventually gains the attention of a prominent music video director who wants her to work with him on his projects. Of course, this puts a strain on the life she already has with her friends and family, as well as her commitment as a dance teacher at the local community center.This movie resembles "Flashdance" in a lot of ways that are too numerous to mention, but that did not stop me from liking "Honey." Jessica Alba gives a great performance and I'm probably sure it was her that kept the movie from going off the tracks. Unfortunately though, it is her and only her, plus a few exciting dance sequences that really make this movie memorable. That is why I rated it a "6." Nonetheless, this movie is good for a Saturday night with some friends if you have nothing else to do.

I can bear this Honey (DVD)

tt0322589

I don't like Hip-Hop, Dance and Choreography! But, nevertheless, I found this movie interesting: Jessica Alba delivers a very sincere interpretation, in which she can express a lot of different feelings.The cast is cool, especially the teens and the close friend of Jessica. For me, Joy Bryant is a new face and I think she steals the show! The story is more about dreams, friendship and dedication than about music, dances! If the bonuses are really boring (the videos, the making-of for videos, an endless deleted scenes), the commentary of Jessica with her then boyfriend-director is fun to listen! Finally, a rather good surprise!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0322589/reviews-149

ur1803589

title: I can bear this Honey (DVD) review: I don't like Hip-Hop, Dance and Choreography! But, nevertheless, I found this movie interesting: Jessica Alba delivers a very sincere interpretation, in which she can express a lot of different feelings.The cast is cool, especially the teens and the close friend of Jessica. For me, Joy Bryant is a new face and I think she steals the show! The story is more about dreams, friendship and dedication than about music, dances! If the bonuses are really boring (the videos, the making-of for videos, an endless deleted scenes), the commentary of Jessica with her then boyfriend-director is fun to listen! Finally, a rather good surprise!

Make the world a better place with dancing?

tt0322589

Review for non-dancersSilly formulaic rubbish - dance obsessed teen who has a fairly hollow life (outside of her desire to dance and be nice to kids) goes through predictable scenarios in her Flashdance/Save-The-Last-Dance-style 'rise to success'. She's a girl from the Bronx who makes good. About as original as a woolworths cover album, but maybe kinda nice as a nice, saccharine-coated hip-hop eulogy firmly aimed at the teen market, as long as you can accept its emptiness without wanting anything more.Review for dancersFrom the first few minutes of this movie, the dancing and music starts pumping and hardly lets up till the end. Most dance movies have a fluffy story interspersed with some cool dancing, one or two have a fluffy story with overly drawn-out dancing, whereas this one hangs on a feelgood story that requires large amounts of snappy dancing in almost every scene.You know that emotion when you see a dancer spin, and from the flick of her hands and hair, sparks fly off and light up the room. Her enthusiasm is so high that just watching her makes you want to give up that day job and do anything that is vaguely music/dance/keep-fit related. You want to just let the light shine out of you every time you dance - for the thrill of it, for the joy it can bring to others, as an affirmation perhaps of life itself.Ballet-trained Honey Daniels (Jessica Alba) works hard just so she can dance - whether it's coaching local kids at hip-hop or bartending in a nightclub so she can dance for free after her shift. Her aim is to break into MTV-style dance videos.(plot spoilers - next para only - short synopsis)When she eventually gets the break, she not only dances but starts producing fabulous choreography for Missy Elliott style numbers for television. The big boss drunkenly tries to get her to sleep with him - and chucks her out when she refuses. She wants to found a dance school for the kids in the Bronx but with her wages cut she has to perform a benefit dance show to raise the cash. The video producer begs her to go back when the recording artists start demanding her but she sticks to her principles. The benefit fund-raiser dance is success, her parents are proud of her, former competitors and worried friends all bond with her, and the kids on the block get their dance school which keeps them off the street life of petty crime.Admittedly if you don't like hip-hop / streetdance / breakdance the film may do nothing for you. If you do, but only dance partner dance, you may feel inspired or even take some of the movements, and practice them to add to your current dance moves. There's plenty of funky moves and some cool choreography.The lead character's humanitarian spirit also brings out one of the highest aims of dancing - to make the world a better place in some small way. Dance should not be divisive - it might be the highest aspiration of the free spirit to communicate joy and bring others together using a language beyond words, beyond social class, age, gender or other things that divide people. Looking at it like this, for those who choose to do so, it gives some meaning to our 'obsession' with dance.I notice hip-hop is being increasingly taught – not an easy dance but fabulous for adding those split timing add-ons. It's also often taught as a work out (check out ads for ‘streetdance'). Timing is tight – fashion is motion – movement is meaning – communication is flow – sex is attitude – feel the rush – Or just go and see Honey . . .

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0322589/reviews-37

ur0064493

title: Make the world a better place with dancing? review: Review for non-dancersSilly formulaic rubbish - dance obsessed teen who has a fairly hollow life (outside of her desire to dance and be nice to kids) goes through predictable scenarios in her Flashdance/Save-The-Last-Dance-style 'rise to success'. She's a girl from the Bronx who makes good. About as original as a woolworths cover album, but maybe kinda nice as a nice, saccharine-coated hip-hop eulogy firmly aimed at the teen market, as long as you can accept its emptiness without wanting anything more.Review for dancersFrom the first few minutes of this movie, the dancing and music starts pumping and hardly lets up till the end. Most dance movies have a fluffy story interspersed with some cool dancing, one or two have a fluffy story with overly drawn-out dancing, whereas this one hangs on a feelgood story that requires large amounts of snappy dancing in almost every scene.You know that emotion when you see a dancer spin, and from the flick of her hands and hair, sparks fly off and light up the room. Her enthusiasm is so high that just watching her makes you want to give up that day job and do anything that is vaguely music/dance/keep-fit related. You want to just let the light shine out of you every time you dance - for the thrill of it, for the joy it can bring to others, as an affirmation perhaps of life itself.Ballet-trained Honey Daniels (Jessica Alba) works hard just so she can dance - whether it's coaching local kids at hip-hop or bartending in a nightclub so she can dance for free after her shift. Her aim is to break into MTV-style dance videos.(plot spoilers - next para only - short synopsis)When she eventually gets the break, she not only dances but starts producing fabulous choreography for Missy Elliott style numbers for television. The big boss drunkenly tries to get her to sleep with him - and chucks her out when she refuses. She wants to found a dance school for the kids in the Bronx but with her wages cut she has to perform a benefit dance show to raise the cash. The video producer begs her to go back when the recording artists start demanding her but she sticks to her principles. The benefit fund-raiser dance is success, her parents are proud of her, former competitors and worried friends all bond with her, and the kids on the block get their dance school which keeps them off the street life of petty crime.Admittedly if you don't like hip-hop / streetdance / breakdance the film may do nothing for you. If you do, but only dance partner dance, you may feel inspired or even take some of the movements, and practice them to add to your current dance moves. There's plenty of funky moves and some cool choreography.The lead character's humanitarian spirit also brings out one of the highest aims of dancing - to make the world a better place in some small way. Dance should not be divisive - it might be the highest aspiration of the free spirit to communicate joy and bring others together using a language beyond words, beyond social class, age, gender or other things that divide people. Looking at it like this, for those who choose to do so, it gives some meaning to our 'obsession' with dance.I notice hip-hop is being increasingly taught – not an easy dance but fabulous for adding those split timing add-ons. It's also often taught as a work out (check out ads for ‘streetdance'). Timing is tight – fashion is motion – movement is meaning – communication is flow – sex is attitude – feel the rush – Or just go and see Honey . . .

Mediocre dance movie

tt0322589

Hip-hop dancer Jessica Alba wants to become a professional, as well as save her dance studio, the only place where local kids can hang out and not get in trouble. Yes, it's a 2000s version of Breakin' 2: Electric Boogaloo. Unfortunately, Honey has little of the charm of the Breakin' movies. Well, maybe in 20 years it'll be seen as camp, too. It's kind of the only way any Jessica Alba movies, save maybe Sin City, will ever be viewed in the future. The film is less than terrible when it focuses on the dancing. I say yes to Jessica Alba dancing. Apparently she knew nothing about dancing before taking the role. It's impressive that she learned how to do it so well. Has no one suggested maybe acting classes?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0322589/reviews-147

ur0391152

title: Mediocre dance movie review: Hip-hop dancer Jessica Alba wants to become a professional, as well as save her dance studio, the only place where local kids can hang out and not get in trouble. Yes, it's a 2000s version of Breakin' 2: Electric Boogaloo. Unfortunately, Honey has little of the charm of the Breakin' movies. Well, maybe in 20 years it'll be seen as camp, too. It's kind of the only way any Jessica Alba movies, save maybe Sin City, will ever be viewed in the future. The film is less than terrible when it focuses on the dancing. I say yes to Jessica Alba dancing. Apparently she knew nothing about dancing before taking the role. It's impressive that she learned how to do it so well. Has no one suggested maybe acting classes?

Rather Episodic but it's still a decent adaptation of real life events!

tt0322589

Jessica Alba gives Jennifer Lopez a run for her money when she stars as real life choreographer Honey Daniels, a gifted club dancer who rose from Hood rags to Hollywood glory when she is discovered by a high profiled but over ambitious music video producer. The screenwriter should have paid more attention to the finer details rather than just writing overblown dance scenes that feature Alba trying her best possible to imitate the dancer she plays in the movie. There is almost no substance as we are taken to the streets of Harlem Newyork to watch where Honey was discovered, watch her humanitarian side (which takes a back seat) to her dancer side, to her meeting famed celebrities and working with them etc. etc. Joy Bryant, looking as skinny as ever plays Honey's best friend and there are many cameos from superstars like Missy Elliot, Ginuwine, Tweet, just to name a few and other co-stars include: Mekhi Pfeiffer (Honey's love interest), Romeo (one of the street kids whom Honey helps out) amongst others. Oh and if you're looking for that Christina Aguilera Song that played in the trailers of the film to be featured prominently, look again. The song is barely in the film. It's all good though.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0322589/reviews-131

ur6739749

title: Rather Episodic but it's still a decent adaptation of real life events! review: Jessica Alba gives Jennifer Lopez a run for her money when she stars as real life choreographer Honey Daniels, a gifted club dancer who rose from Hood rags to Hollywood glory when she is discovered by a high profiled but over ambitious music video producer. The screenwriter should have paid more attention to the finer details rather than just writing overblown dance scenes that feature Alba trying her best possible to imitate the dancer she plays in the movie. There is almost no substance as we are taken to the streets of Harlem Newyork to watch where Honey was discovered, watch her humanitarian side (which takes a back seat) to her dancer side, to her meeting famed celebrities and working with them etc. etc. Joy Bryant, looking as skinny as ever plays Honey's best friend and there are many cameos from superstars like Missy Elliot, Ginuwine, Tweet, just to name a few and other co-stars include: Mekhi Pfeiffer (Honey's love interest), Romeo (one of the street kids whom Honey helps out) amongst others. Oh and if you're looking for that Christina Aguilera Song that played in the trailers of the film to be featured prominently, look again. The song is barely in the film. It's all good though.