Datasets:

DDDDZQ

/

imdb_reviews

like 0

A western unlike any other you may have seen

tt0443680

Revisionist westerns are nothing new. They have been around since the fifties when directors realized they could be used to explore motives and psychologies deeper than conventional good guy versus bad guy histrionics. In 1969 Hollywood gave us two radical 'revisionist' westerns in which the style of the movie itself was used to subvert the genre. Although radically different in tone, both George Roy Hill's "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" and Sam Peckinpah's "The Wild Bunch" seemed to signal, if not quite the death of the genre, then a move away from the kind of western Hollywood had been giving us thus far. Since then, of course, westerns have been few and far between but all of them seem to have been influenced by this departure.Perhaps "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" moves further away than most from the traditional format. It certainly looks traditional. Roger Deakins' stunning cinematography vividly captures, not just the wide open spaces, but the dark, lamp-lit interiors to great effect. And it sounds traditional as well. The writer, Andrew Dominik, who also directed the film, in adapting Ron Hansen's source novel, has given full voice to the quaintly idiomatic dialogue of those times. In this respect it is much more traditional than many westerns of the thirties, forties or fifties. In every other respect it qualifies, in spades, for the term 'revisionist'.For a start there is little action. This is no gun-slinging oater but a long, (160 minutes), slow, deliberate character piece. When the film begins Jesse's life is almost over. The narrator tells us of his past deeds and what has brought him to this point. He also fills us in on the psychology of the man with Brad Pitt filling in the rest with a superb, career-defining performance. This is not the Jesse James of legend, (although, of course, in the film he is accorded legendary status); no Robin Hood figure robbing the rich and giving it to the poor but a pathologically unstable man, no longer a boy yet without maturity. His brother Frank, (a superb but under-used Sam Shepard), is like a gnarled father-figure to him. This Jesse is an outlaw first and foremost, a cold-blooded killer destined to live on the hop or be hunted down and killed.Perhaps it is this lack of maturity that draws him to the even more immature Robert Ford. It has been noted that this version of events is really a study in celebrity or rather a study of the perils that celebrity brings. Ford is the ultimate fan but a fan whose final act of homage is to destroy the star to whom he's drawn. At one point Jesse says to him 'I don't know if you want to be like me or want to be me'. It also could be argued that Ford was homosexually attracted to Jesse were it not for the fact he comes over as such a pathetically asexual creature, at least while Jesse is still alive. Rather he becomes Jesse's whipping-boy and you may think, 'is it any wonder the worm has turned'.Much of the film's two hour forty minute running time is taken up with talk and talk that seeks to explore the psychosis of its protagonists. I can understand why this won't be to everybody's taste. We live in an action-fueled age and have short attention spans. This is a film that demands a lot from its audience and amply rewards us. It is a beautifully crafted movie, intelligent and thought-provoking. Dominik's influences range from Peckinpah and Eastwood to Terrence Mallick yet the film seems wholly original, unlike anything in the genre we may have encountered before.If Pitt is a superb, taciturn Jesse then Casey Affleck is a mesmerizing Robert Ford. It's a great performance from this young and basically untried actor who, in every gesture, in the flicker of his eyes, in the faltering speech, inhabits the part entirely, as much in his mind as in his body. He has already won a number of critic's prizes for his performance but is unlikely to pick up the Oscar. The Academy prefers showier displays which is why this magnificent film is unlikely to prove a success either at the Oscars or with the public at large.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-102

ur1683855

title: A western unlike any other you may have seen review: Revisionist westerns are nothing new. They have been around since the fifties when directors realized they could be used to explore motives and psychologies deeper than conventional good guy versus bad guy histrionics. In 1969 Hollywood gave us two radical 'revisionist' westerns in which the style of the movie itself was used to subvert the genre. Although radically different in tone, both George Roy Hill's "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" and Sam Peckinpah's "The Wild Bunch" seemed to signal, if not quite the death of the genre, then a move away from the kind of western Hollywood had been giving us thus far. Since then, of course, westerns have been few and far between but all of them seem to have been influenced by this departure.Perhaps "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" moves further away than most from the traditional format. It certainly looks traditional. Roger Deakins' stunning cinematography vividly captures, not just the wide open spaces, but the dark, lamp-lit interiors to great effect. And it sounds traditional as well. The writer, Andrew Dominik, who also directed the film, in adapting Ron Hansen's source novel, has given full voice to the quaintly idiomatic dialogue of those times. In this respect it is much more traditional than many westerns of the thirties, forties or fifties. In every other respect it qualifies, in spades, for the term 'revisionist'.For a start there is little action. This is no gun-slinging oater but a long, (160 minutes), slow, deliberate character piece. When the film begins Jesse's life is almost over. The narrator tells us of his past deeds and what has brought him to this point. He also fills us in on the psychology of the man with Brad Pitt filling in the rest with a superb, career-defining performance. This is not the Jesse James of legend, (although, of course, in the film he is accorded legendary status); no Robin Hood figure robbing the rich and giving it to the poor but a pathologically unstable man, no longer a boy yet without maturity. His brother Frank, (a superb but under-used Sam Shepard), is like a gnarled father-figure to him. This Jesse is an outlaw first and foremost, a cold-blooded killer destined to live on the hop or be hunted down and killed.Perhaps it is this lack of maturity that draws him to the even more immature Robert Ford. It has been noted that this version of events is really a study in celebrity or rather a study of the perils that celebrity brings. Ford is the ultimate fan but a fan whose final act of homage is to destroy the star to whom he's drawn. At one point Jesse says to him 'I don't know if you want to be like me or want to be me'. It also could be argued that Ford was homosexually attracted to Jesse were it not for the fact he comes over as such a pathetically asexual creature, at least while Jesse is still alive. Rather he becomes Jesse's whipping-boy and you may think, 'is it any wonder the worm has turned'.Much of the film's two hour forty minute running time is taken up with talk and talk that seeks to explore the psychosis of its protagonists. I can understand why this won't be to everybody's taste. We live in an action-fueled age and have short attention spans. This is a film that demands a lot from its audience and amply rewards us. It is a beautifully crafted movie, intelligent and thought-provoking. Dominik's influences range from Peckinpah and Eastwood to Terrence Mallick yet the film seems wholly original, unlike anything in the genre we may have encountered before.If Pitt is a superb, taciturn Jesse then Casey Affleck is a mesmerizing Robert Ford. It's a great performance from this young and basically untried actor who, in every gesture, in the flicker of his eyes, in the faltering speech, inhabits the part entirely, as much in his mind as in his body. He has already won a number of critic's prizes for his performance but is unlikely to pick up the Oscar. The Academy prefers showier displays which is why this magnificent film is unlikely to prove a success either at the Oscars or with the public at large.

Fine Western Revisionism

tt0443680

Since the release of Clint Eastwood's excellent Unforgiven back in 1990, the Western has slowly been making a comeback, especially in the 2000s, with films like the 3:10 to Yuma, the brilliant TV Series Deadwood to even foreign entries like Australia's the Proposition and South Korea's The Good, the Bad and the Weird. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is the closest out of the modern Western to come need Eastwood's masterpiece.As the title of the film suggests, this film is about Jesse James' assassination. It focuses on the end of Jesse James' (Brad Pitt) career and life and his relationship with Robert 'Bob' Ford (Casey Affleck). Jesse James was an outlaw in Missouri, with a reputation as a Robin Hood like figure. It starts out in a forest where Jesse James was with his gang. This is 19-year-old Bob Ford's first encounter with the man. He gets involved with a train robbery with the gang. Jesse James takes a liking to Ford, but Frank James (Sam Shepard) doesn't trust the kid. Bob Ford quickly becomes a member of Jesse James' gang, rising up the ranks and just happy to be with his idol. The gang act like as an extended family to James, even living with his wife and family. Sometimes Jesse James goes off on his own, and leave the gang with his family. But within the gang there are problems, Bob Ford doesn't get on with other members and some of the member even planned to capture James and give him over to the authorities for money. The gang take the mick out of Bob for his hero worship and this leads to him threaten them. The gang splits up and James derides Bob, forcing him to leave. Bob leaves the gang and plans his revenge. He sees that James wasn't a hero and ends up going to the authorities and works with them. With his brother Charley (Sam Rockwell), plan to kill Jesse James.This is a wonderfully acted, beautifully shot film. Brad Pitt is a great actor most of the time and this film offers one of his strongest performances. This is a rare performance as a villain and shows Jesse James as a psychotic thug. Casey Affleck is also excellent as the creepy Bob Ford. The film also has excellent performances from by Rockwell, Paul Schneider, Jeremy Renner and Mary-Louise Parker (an actress I really like). It also has a surprising performance by the Raging Cagan James Carville who is famous for being Bill Clinton's election adviser.The director of the film was Andrew Dominik, an New Zealand born Australian. This is his first film since the excellent Chopper. With his cinematographer Roger Deakins shot the film with a slightly wash-out look that gives the film a beautiful, but bleak view of the Old-West. A scene which shots Jesse James hand going along with grain blowing in the wind reminded me a little of Gladiator, which isn't surprising seeing Ridley Scott was a producer.The Assassination of Jesse James takes a psychological approach, and looks at the relationship within the group and between the character. It was an extended family. There is no glamour in their criminal lives and Jesse James slowly melt's down as a character. It also looks at the theme of hero worship and how meeting your heroes may not be that rewarding. It takes to take a realistic approach to the Old West. If you want an action-packed film then you are going to be disappointed.Unforuanately the film does have some problems. It is slow at times which makes the film drag. It also reminded me too much of Unforgiven, which was a classic. It was also easy to get lost with the amount of characters and the deals that were made.It's a fine 4 out of 5.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-295

ur17571044

title: Fine Western Revisionism review: Since the release of Clint Eastwood's excellent Unforgiven back in 1990, the Western has slowly been making a comeback, especially in the 2000s, with films like the 3:10 to Yuma, the brilliant TV Series Deadwood to even foreign entries like Australia's the Proposition and South Korea's The Good, the Bad and the Weird. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is the closest out of the modern Western to come need Eastwood's masterpiece.As the title of the film suggests, this film is about Jesse James' assassination. It focuses on the end of Jesse James' (Brad Pitt) career and life and his relationship with Robert 'Bob' Ford (Casey Affleck). Jesse James was an outlaw in Missouri, with a reputation as a Robin Hood like figure. It starts out in a forest where Jesse James was with his gang. This is 19-year-old Bob Ford's first encounter with the man. He gets involved with a train robbery with the gang. Jesse James takes a liking to Ford, but Frank James (Sam Shepard) doesn't trust the kid. Bob Ford quickly becomes a member of Jesse James' gang, rising up the ranks and just happy to be with his idol. The gang act like as an extended family to James, even living with his wife and family. Sometimes Jesse James goes off on his own, and leave the gang with his family. But within the gang there are problems, Bob Ford doesn't get on with other members and some of the member even planned to capture James and give him over to the authorities for money. The gang take the mick out of Bob for his hero worship and this leads to him threaten them. The gang splits up and James derides Bob, forcing him to leave. Bob leaves the gang and plans his revenge. He sees that James wasn't a hero and ends up going to the authorities and works with them. With his brother Charley (Sam Rockwell), plan to kill Jesse James.This is a wonderfully acted, beautifully shot film. Brad Pitt is a great actor most of the time and this film offers one of his strongest performances. This is a rare performance as a villain and shows Jesse James as a psychotic thug. Casey Affleck is also excellent as the creepy Bob Ford. The film also has excellent performances from by Rockwell, Paul Schneider, Jeremy Renner and Mary-Louise Parker (an actress I really like). It also has a surprising performance by the Raging Cagan James Carville who is famous for being Bill Clinton's election adviser.The director of the film was Andrew Dominik, an New Zealand born Australian. This is his first film since the excellent Chopper. With his cinematographer Roger Deakins shot the film with a slightly wash-out look that gives the film a beautiful, but bleak view of the Old-West. A scene which shots Jesse James hand going along with grain blowing in the wind reminded me a little of Gladiator, which isn't surprising seeing Ridley Scott was a producer.The Assassination of Jesse James takes a psychological approach, and looks at the relationship within the group and between the character. It was an extended family. There is no glamour in their criminal lives and Jesse James slowly melt's down as a character. It also looks at the theme of hero worship and how meeting your heroes may not be that rewarding. It takes to take a realistic approach to the Old West. If you want an action-packed film then you are going to be disappointed.Unforuanately the film does have some problems. It is slow at times which makes the film drag. It also reminded me too much of Unforgiven, which was a classic. It was also easy to get lost with the amount of characters and the deals that were made.It's a fine 4 out of 5.

Lyrical, crushingly atmospheric revisionist western

tt0443680

Few films of the calibre of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford emerge within the cinema these days - after all, it is difficult to envision a slow, thoughtful western with a running time as ponderously lengthy as its title being an easy sell to studios who it would seem have primarily lost interest in the genre in the first place - a fact the film's continual failure to pick up a distributor despite the presence of mega-star Brad Pitt is a testament to. But at the same time it is difficult to imagine a more compelling justification for the re-emergence of dusty trails and six-shooters than this one - an astonishingly powerful, engrossing and impeccably crafted modern masterpiece, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is a breath of cinematic fresh air, and one of the most impacting films released in recent memory. Director/screenwriter Andrew Dominik has crafted a modern day epic of near unparalleled mood, the sparse script providing a lyrical, crushingly atmospheric revisionist western, musing on fatalism, celebrity worship, madness and the construction of a legend in a truly gripping, inescapably thought provoking fashion. While the film's staggering running time and slow pacing will be enough to deter many viewers unaccustomed to such genre conventions, the film's consistently claustrophobic fatalistic overtones, like a steadily tightening glove, and sporadic, casual bursts of visceral violence make for a taught and engrossing watch throughout its lengthy duration. The film is hardly intended to boast an M. Night Shyamalan style twist, its most impacting plot point revealed within the title, but is instead a treatise on fatalism, and the overpowering, inescapable mood continually palpable throughout is truly crushing and stunning simultaneously. As Roger Deakins' exquisitely composed cinematography haunts the viewer with desolate visions of a withering west (the sequence of the last ever train robbery by James' gang is a moodily beautiful masterpiece in itself), Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' eerily affecting score craft a mood like none other, fully immersing the viewer within the nihilistic realm of the film and wrenching their emotions while flooring them with the impeccable craftsmanship of the work on display. Staunchly driving home the resonance of the film is its powerful cast, each giving a masterfully heartfelt performance simultaneously making the material ring with realism and simmer with incendiary intensity. Brad Pitt inhabits the fragile, world weary psyche of the legendary titular character with pitch perfect muted ferocious charisma, impeccably essaying a character inevitably on the decline while feebly grasping at trace elements of his previous infamy. Behind Pitt's glimmering blue eyes lies the haunted glint of madness, and a single moment, where James lets escape a delirious cackle of a maddened laugh is the film's single most gripping and devastating moment - one of the most full bodied, masterful performances the genre has ever generated. As astonishing as Pitt's performance is, Casey Affleck manages to match him on almost every occasion as the similarly psychologically fragile Robert Ford, toeing the perfect balance between unnerving fanaticism and eerie resentment towards his idol James. However, Affleck refuses to let the audience dismiss Ford as an imbalanced mental case, and bestows enough fractured humanity after a life of rejection within the character to make his performance ring frighteningly sympathetic, a testament to the incredible talent of the rising star. Sam Rockwell also stands out, giving a subtle but powerfully resonant performance as Ford's older brother, Charley, shining in what might have dissipated into a non-existent supporting role in the hands of a less talented performer. Paul Schneider similarly impresses as an oddly verbose outlaw attempting to escape James' gang, and Sam Shepard is a powerful presence as James' older brother, radiating calm fury and muted power ever second on screen. Haunting, resonant and tremendously moving, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford sticks with the viewer for quite some time after its initial viewing. While those unaccustomed with the western genre may find the same faults here as with the majority of its contemporaries, the sheer emotional resonance, muted technical beauty and astonishing performances are enough to buoy the film into the realm of the most powerful and affecting modern westerns, and one of the strongest films of many years past, easily worth pursuing for those seeking a numbingly powerful modern masterpiece. -9.5/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-233

ur3728510

title: Lyrical, crushingly atmospheric revisionist western review: Few films of the calibre of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford emerge within the cinema these days - after all, it is difficult to envision a slow, thoughtful western with a running time as ponderously lengthy as its title being an easy sell to studios who it would seem have primarily lost interest in the genre in the first place - a fact the film's continual failure to pick up a distributor despite the presence of mega-star Brad Pitt is a testament to. But at the same time it is difficult to imagine a more compelling justification for the re-emergence of dusty trails and six-shooters than this one - an astonishingly powerful, engrossing and impeccably crafted modern masterpiece, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is a breath of cinematic fresh air, and one of the most impacting films released in recent memory. Director/screenwriter Andrew Dominik has crafted a modern day epic of near unparalleled mood, the sparse script providing a lyrical, crushingly atmospheric revisionist western, musing on fatalism, celebrity worship, madness and the construction of a legend in a truly gripping, inescapably thought provoking fashion. While the film's staggering running time and slow pacing will be enough to deter many viewers unaccustomed to such genre conventions, the film's consistently claustrophobic fatalistic overtones, like a steadily tightening glove, and sporadic, casual bursts of visceral violence make for a taught and engrossing watch throughout its lengthy duration. The film is hardly intended to boast an M. Night Shyamalan style twist, its most impacting plot point revealed within the title, but is instead a treatise on fatalism, and the overpowering, inescapable mood continually palpable throughout is truly crushing and stunning simultaneously. As Roger Deakins' exquisitely composed cinematography haunts the viewer with desolate visions of a withering west (the sequence of the last ever train robbery by James' gang is a moodily beautiful masterpiece in itself), Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' eerily affecting score craft a mood like none other, fully immersing the viewer within the nihilistic realm of the film and wrenching their emotions while flooring them with the impeccable craftsmanship of the work on display. Staunchly driving home the resonance of the film is its powerful cast, each giving a masterfully heartfelt performance simultaneously making the material ring with realism and simmer with incendiary intensity. Brad Pitt inhabits the fragile, world weary psyche of the legendary titular character with pitch perfect muted ferocious charisma, impeccably essaying a character inevitably on the decline while feebly grasping at trace elements of his previous infamy. Behind Pitt's glimmering blue eyes lies the haunted glint of madness, and a single moment, where James lets escape a delirious cackle of a maddened laugh is the film's single most gripping and devastating moment - one of the most full bodied, masterful performances the genre has ever generated. As astonishing as Pitt's performance is, Casey Affleck manages to match him on almost every occasion as the similarly psychologically fragile Robert Ford, toeing the perfect balance between unnerving fanaticism and eerie resentment towards his idol James. However, Affleck refuses to let the audience dismiss Ford as an imbalanced mental case, and bestows enough fractured humanity after a life of rejection within the character to make his performance ring frighteningly sympathetic, a testament to the incredible talent of the rising star. Sam Rockwell also stands out, giving a subtle but powerfully resonant performance as Ford's older brother, Charley, shining in what might have dissipated into a non-existent supporting role in the hands of a less talented performer. Paul Schneider similarly impresses as an oddly verbose outlaw attempting to escape James' gang, and Sam Shepard is a powerful presence as James' older brother, radiating calm fury and muted power ever second on screen. Haunting, resonant and tremendously moving, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford sticks with the viewer for quite some time after its initial viewing. While those unaccustomed with the western genre may find the same faults here as with the majority of its contemporaries, the sheer emotional resonance, muted technical beauty and astonishing performances are enough to buoy the film into the realm of the most powerful and affecting modern westerns, and one of the strongest films of many years past, easily worth pursuing for those seeking a numbingly powerful modern masterpiece. -9.5/10

Recapitulating the act of betrayal…The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

tt0443680

In what could be my favorite film name of all-time, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is much more than its superfluous moniker. From its bloated runtime to its slow, methodical pace, Andrew Dominik's epic tale contains an inner beauty that allows for all the pretensions one seems to associate with it. Dominik is unrelenting on his quest to tell the story the way he wants it told, never compromising by cutting scenes or shortening the name so it will fit on theatre marquees. The film even seems to have been languishing in the doldrums for over a year before finally seeing the light of day. Maybe the time was spent because no one would distribute it without changes, and if that is so, I'm glad to have waited for its introduction. Had anything been compromised, I don't think I would have enjoyed my time nearly as much. Do not expect the wild west or gun fights at every corner. This is not a tale of excess or young guns, but instead one of paranoia, suspicion, friendship, and betrayal from all sides.I thought I would be seeing James during his heydays of robbery and murder, eventually meeting his demise at the hands of one of his crew. Instead, we are introduced to the legend just before his final night ride with brother Frank. It is the last train robbery he undertook, before attempting to retire home with his wife and kids, that he meets the Ford brothers and their ragtag degenerate friends. James is no longer as God-like as he might once have been. A shell of his former self, he is constantly uprooting his family, children who don't even know his real name, in fear of capture by the Pinkertons. Always paranoid and untrusting of those around him, after all his brother has retired and his normal crew all gone, jailed, or dead, James begins to fear for his safety. By riding to cleanse himself of those that may be conspiring against him, he begins a journey that will take him back into the friendship of Robert and Charlie Ford. Whether from depression caused by the memories of all he has done or an escalation of the malice and crazed disposition that allowed him to do it, this reunion for a series of planned bank robberies finally leads to his end.Dominik's film is filled to the brim with nuance and subtlety. At every turn we are even quiet moments of the landscape and metered prose of speech, slowly contemplated and released into conversation. Everything is orchestrated with great care and each frame a thing of beauty. The film must have been storyboarded like crazy because the compositions of each scene is balanced and gorgeous to behold. From the extreme close-ups, the smoke-laden atmosphere, and the visions from behind period-aged impure glass, Dominik has taken painstaking care in making sure each second is perfect. Even the narrated moments telling of James' past are vignetted and blurred to give a sense of age and dream-state. Everything is deliberately timed, both enhancing the period being portrayed and adding to the mood and almost nonexistent changes in mental disposition as the wheels turn inside each character's head.All the acting on screen is top-notch. Brad Pitt really shows how good he is as the man behind the stories. This is a time of instability for him as his state of mind causes uncontrollable outbursts of violence followed by fits of laughter at the lapse in control. He realizes that he is not himself anymore and it is this knowledge of his own fallibility that makes him even more cautious of what is happening all around him. Did he deserve the best actor award at Venice this year? I don't know. He is very good, possibly close to his best, however, he was overshadowed, to me, by costar Casey Affleck's Robert Ford. He truly shines as the young kid able to ride alongside his idol only to be shot down as strange and queer. His joy, expressed very openly to his hero, comes at a very bad time. Just as James starts to look at everyone more carefully, in comes this kid with a dangerous obsession. As Pitt says before sending Ford away, "I can't tell if you want to be like me, or be me." Affleck's performance is one of the years best. The times when he must try and hide the rage bottled up inside while his dreams of being the James Brother's sidekick shatter are tough to watch. From this showing, Ford was no coward, but a man tired of being kicked while he was down. Perhaps the act of murder itself was cowardly, but only because of the circumstances surrounding it. Ford was working for the sheriff in order to capture the criminal, but when the opportunity presented itself, when James finally realized what was to happen, you can't help feel sorry for the 20-year old has he wrestles with what is about to transpire.I applaud Dominik for having the courage to create something that is by no means a bankable commodity. For every person that goes to see Brad Pitt's new movie, there will be at least three that scoff at the almost three-hour duration and slow unfolding of plot. Either way, this film is a masterpiece to behold, a work of art encapsulating a moment of history. Even the epilogue, of what happens to Ford after the assassination, helps shape the motivations for all that transpired during the course of the film. It never feels boring and it never shies from the weight it carries on its shoulders. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is simply something that needs to be seen to understand the effect it has, and that experience should be at the theatre so its composition and visual splendor can be viewed in all its glory.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-29

ur2020154

title: Recapitulating the act of betrayal…The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford review: In what could be my favorite film name of all-time, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is much more than its superfluous moniker. From its bloated runtime to its slow, methodical pace, Andrew Dominik's epic tale contains an inner beauty that allows for all the pretensions one seems to associate with it. Dominik is unrelenting on his quest to tell the story the way he wants it told, never compromising by cutting scenes or shortening the name so it will fit on theatre marquees. The film even seems to have been languishing in the doldrums for over a year before finally seeing the light of day. Maybe the time was spent because no one would distribute it without changes, and if that is so, I'm glad to have waited for its introduction. Had anything been compromised, I don't think I would have enjoyed my time nearly as much. Do not expect the wild west or gun fights at every corner. This is not a tale of excess or young guns, but instead one of paranoia, suspicion, friendship, and betrayal from all sides.I thought I would be seeing James during his heydays of robbery and murder, eventually meeting his demise at the hands of one of his crew. Instead, we are introduced to the legend just before his final night ride with brother Frank. It is the last train robbery he undertook, before attempting to retire home with his wife and kids, that he meets the Ford brothers and their ragtag degenerate friends. James is no longer as God-like as he might once have been. A shell of his former self, he is constantly uprooting his family, children who don't even know his real name, in fear of capture by the Pinkertons. Always paranoid and untrusting of those around him, after all his brother has retired and his normal crew all gone, jailed, or dead, James begins to fear for his safety. By riding to cleanse himself of those that may be conspiring against him, he begins a journey that will take him back into the friendship of Robert and Charlie Ford. Whether from depression caused by the memories of all he has done or an escalation of the malice and crazed disposition that allowed him to do it, this reunion for a series of planned bank robberies finally leads to his end.Dominik's film is filled to the brim with nuance and subtlety. At every turn we are even quiet moments of the landscape and metered prose of speech, slowly contemplated and released into conversation. Everything is orchestrated with great care and each frame a thing of beauty. The film must have been storyboarded like crazy because the compositions of each scene is balanced and gorgeous to behold. From the extreme close-ups, the smoke-laden atmosphere, and the visions from behind period-aged impure glass, Dominik has taken painstaking care in making sure each second is perfect. Even the narrated moments telling of James' past are vignetted and blurred to give a sense of age and dream-state. Everything is deliberately timed, both enhancing the period being portrayed and adding to the mood and almost nonexistent changes in mental disposition as the wheels turn inside each character's head.All the acting on screen is top-notch. Brad Pitt really shows how good he is as the man behind the stories. This is a time of instability for him as his state of mind causes uncontrollable outbursts of violence followed by fits of laughter at the lapse in control. He realizes that he is not himself anymore and it is this knowledge of his own fallibility that makes him even more cautious of what is happening all around him. Did he deserve the best actor award at Venice this year? I don't know. He is very good, possibly close to his best, however, he was overshadowed, to me, by costar Casey Affleck's Robert Ford. He truly shines as the young kid able to ride alongside his idol only to be shot down as strange and queer. His joy, expressed very openly to his hero, comes at a very bad time. Just as James starts to look at everyone more carefully, in comes this kid with a dangerous obsession. As Pitt says before sending Ford away, "I can't tell if you want to be like me, or be me." Affleck's performance is one of the years best. The times when he must try and hide the rage bottled up inside while his dreams of being the James Brother's sidekick shatter are tough to watch. From this showing, Ford was no coward, but a man tired of being kicked while he was down. Perhaps the act of murder itself was cowardly, but only because of the circumstances surrounding it. Ford was working for the sheriff in order to capture the criminal, but when the opportunity presented itself, when James finally realized what was to happen, you can't help feel sorry for the 20-year old has he wrestles with what is about to transpire.I applaud Dominik for having the courage to create something that is by no means a bankable commodity. For every person that goes to see Brad Pitt's new movie, there will be at least three that scoff at the almost three-hour duration and slow unfolding of plot. Either way, this film is a masterpiece to behold, a work of art encapsulating a moment of history. Even the epilogue, of what happens to Ford after the assassination, helps shape the motivations for all that transpired during the course of the film. It never feels boring and it never shies from the weight it carries on its shoulders. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is simply something that needs to be seen to understand the effect it has, and that experience should be at the theatre so its composition and visual splendor can be viewed in all its glory.

powerful, poetic, compelling

tt0443680

The title already tells the whole story and yet The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford still manages to enamor its audience with its powerful, poetic cinematography and compelling acting that you will forgive its flaws, which are few.Director Andrew Dominik really took his time (2.6 hours!), but this is established early on, and lulls you into the idyllic environs of the time. You realize later on that this was necessary, as this helps set up the unexpected moments.Playing Robert Ford is Casey Affleck, who is arguably nominated for an Oscar for Best Performance Supporting Actor when he was practically the lead. He was perfect for the role: his cracking voice and shifty manner, his feeble, irksome and spineless performance is exceptional, reminiscent of The Talented Mr. Ripley. He is able to mix showing his deep awe and fear of his childhood idol Jesse James, played by Brad Pitt.For the first time, Pitt becomes the character he plays in the movie and it's unnerving. He was the perfect mix of charismatic yet scary; you don't know when he'll snap so you're also kept on your toes just like the others around him. Disturbed, suspicious and agitated, he could be smooth and suave one moment, then unleash his wrath so quickly. Even when he had no lines, his face and gestures spoke volumes. You could imagine feeling very vulnerable, the way he'd look at people when he's trying to figure out if they were lying. He is at once tormented, charming, and terrifying.Pitt and Affleck successfully translate the complexities on screen: Jesse James is the fierce bandit who made people uneasy yet is able to evoke compassion; Robert Ford tries so hard to please buts ends up forgettable and despised.The attention given to the rest of the cast, which includes Sam Rockwell (as Robert's brother Charley), Mary-Louise Parker (as Jesse's wife Zee), and Sam Shepard (as Jesse's brother Frank) was distracting but they deserve their screen time. Roger Deakins must win the Best Achievement in Cinematography Oscar for his work in this film, as he expertly toyed between the stark, Spartan settings during the day and the more gritty scenery at night.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-153

ur10756301

title: powerful, poetic, compelling review: The title already tells the whole story and yet The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford still manages to enamor its audience with its powerful, poetic cinematography and compelling acting that you will forgive its flaws, which are few.Director Andrew Dominik really took his time (2.6 hours!), but this is established early on, and lulls you into the idyllic environs of the time. You realize later on that this was necessary, as this helps set up the unexpected moments.Playing Robert Ford is Casey Affleck, who is arguably nominated for an Oscar for Best Performance Supporting Actor when he was practically the lead. He was perfect for the role: his cracking voice and shifty manner, his feeble, irksome and spineless performance is exceptional, reminiscent of The Talented Mr. Ripley. He is able to mix showing his deep awe and fear of his childhood idol Jesse James, played by Brad Pitt.For the first time, Pitt becomes the character he plays in the movie and it's unnerving. He was the perfect mix of charismatic yet scary; you don't know when he'll snap so you're also kept on your toes just like the others around him. Disturbed, suspicious and agitated, he could be smooth and suave one moment, then unleash his wrath so quickly. Even when he had no lines, his face and gestures spoke volumes. You could imagine feeling very vulnerable, the way he'd look at people when he's trying to figure out if they were lying. He is at once tormented, charming, and terrifying.Pitt and Affleck successfully translate the complexities on screen: Jesse James is the fierce bandit who made people uneasy yet is able to evoke compassion; Robert Ford tries so hard to please buts ends up forgettable and despised.The attention given to the rest of the cast, which includes Sam Rockwell (as Robert's brother Charley), Mary-Louise Parker (as Jesse's wife Zee), and Sam Shepard (as Jesse's brother Frank) was distracting but they deserve their screen time. Roger Deakins must win the Best Achievement in Cinematography Oscar for his work in this film, as he expertly toyed between the stark, Spartan settings during the day and the more gritty scenery at night.

Simply amazing.

tt0443680

Amazing. Simply amazing. 'The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford' is not a movie more than it is an experience. One that takes us to another place and time entirely. And folks, this is about as good as they come. A deliberate and methodical period piece, this is masterful storytelling on every level with a brilliant score to boot. A true American epic with gut-wrenching performances, 'Jesse James' is nothing short of an art form. It will transfix you, it will mesmerize you, it will haunt you.Written and directed to perfection by Andrew Dominik, 'The Assassination of Jesse James' is filmed in the vast open lands of Canada. There's such a profound and unspoken beauty that reaches beyond the film with strokes of sweeping majesty. Words simply fail you as James walks peacefully through fields of grain, gracefully allowing his fingers to brush against the tall, delicate crops. Not unlike this year's heartbreaking 'Into the Wild', cinematographer Roger Deakins uses nature's sweet marvels to walk side-by-side with Jesse James in the telling one of America's greatest tales.Coming in at 2 hours and 40 minutes, 'Jesse James' is a brilliantly rich and textured story. This is not a typical Western filled with gunslinging cowboys and tense shootouts, but that won't keep you from hanging on every twist and turn this film has to offer. And even though we already know the eventual outcome walking in to this film, it's the poetically layered story filled with fully realized characters that will keep you glued to your seat. Laced with such a detailed narration that seems to have been taken straight from the pages of the source novel, this legendary story stitched into the seams of American lore comes to life with that very same power.Bolstering some of the year's strongest performances, one can't ignore Brad Pitt's piercing gaze that makes him a perfect candidate to transform into one of America's original celebrities. He's a man who has both everything and nothing, and a tight-knit group of comrades that is slowly but steadily ebbing away. As he becomes further isolated, his sense of reality slips away. Pitt's character transformation is subtle but profound, and certainly moving. But it is Casey Affleck's emotional performance as Robert Ford, the man who commits the fatal betrayal, who gives 'Jesse James' a hard-hitting punch to the gut with a downright dynamite performance. Yet another intense character study, Affleck takes us on a roller-coaster ride as the man who puts a bullet in the back of the man he once adored so much. How could a quiet, socially awkward young man who was never paid much attention pull off such an amazing feat? 'Jesse James' paints such a harrowing and tragic portrait of both men, one of the film's most redeeming and unforgettable qualities. Two of the best performances these two men can ever hope to deliver.There's a lot to be said about 'The Assassination of Jessie James'. It's a film for the ages, an unforgettable masterpiece that exemplifies the very definition of perfection. It's achingly beautiful, and unlike anything you have ever seen or ever will see. It's a story that still captivates us, but while this American masterpiece follows no set path, there are many themes that seem more poignant today than ever before. Because I believe the central most theme that can be taken away from a film like this is in fact its study of celebrity status. The fame, the glory, the adoration. Our society's extreme fascination with stars that borders on obsession, it can't be healthy. And perhaps there are things we can take away from 'Jessie James', straight from the mouth of the coward himself. "He's just a human being," he tells us. "I was surprised by what happened. They didn't applaud." More reviews at rottentomatoes.com/vine/journal_view.php?journalid=219276&view=public

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-243

ur3603551

title: Simply amazing. review: Amazing. Simply amazing. 'The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford' is not a movie more than it is an experience. One that takes us to another place and time entirely. And folks, this is about as good as they come. A deliberate and methodical period piece, this is masterful storytelling on every level with a brilliant score to boot. A true American epic with gut-wrenching performances, 'Jesse James' is nothing short of an art form. It will transfix you, it will mesmerize you, it will haunt you.Written and directed to perfection by Andrew Dominik, 'The Assassination of Jesse James' is filmed in the vast open lands of Canada. There's such a profound and unspoken beauty that reaches beyond the film with strokes of sweeping majesty. Words simply fail you as James walks peacefully through fields of grain, gracefully allowing his fingers to brush against the tall, delicate crops. Not unlike this year's heartbreaking 'Into the Wild', cinematographer Roger Deakins uses nature's sweet marvels to walk side-by-side with Jesse James in the telling one of America's greatest tales.Coming in at 2 hours and 40 minutes, 'Jesse James' is a brilliantly rich and textured story. This is not a typical Western filled with gunslinging cowboys and tense shootouts, but that won't keep you from hanging on every twist and turn this film has to offer. And even though we already know the eventual outcome walking in to this film, it's the poetically layered story filled with fully realized characters that will keep you glued to your seat. Laced with such a detailed narration that seems to have been taken straight from the pages of the source novel, this legendary story stitched into the seams of American lore comes to life with that very same power.Bolstering some of the year's strongest performances, one can't ignore Brad Pitt's piercing gaze that makes him a perfect candidate to transform into one of America's original celebrities. He's a man who has both everything and nothing, and a tight-knit group of comrades that is slowly but steadily ebbing away. As he becomes further isolated, his sense of reality slips away. Pitt's character transformation is subtle but profound, and certainly moving. But it is Casey Affleck's emotional performance as Robert Ford, the man who commits the fatal betrayal, who gives 'Jesse James' a hard-hitting punch to the gut with a downright dynamite performance. Yet another intense character study, Affleck takes us on a roller-coaster ride as the man who puts a bullet in the back of the man he once adored so much. How could a quiet, socially awkward young man who was never paid much attention pull off such an amazing feat? 'Jesse James' paints such a harrowing and tragic portrait of both men, one of the film's most redeeming and unforgettable qualities. Two of the best performances these two men can ever hope to deliver.There's a lot to be said about 'The Assassination of Jessie James'. It's a film for the ages, an unforgettable masterpiece that exemplifies the very definition of perfection. It's achingly beautiful, and unlike anything you have ever seen or ever will see. It's a story that still captivates us, but while this American masterpiece follows no set path, there are many themes that seem more poignant today than ever before. Because I believe the central most theme that can be taken away from a film like this is in fact its study of celebrity status. The fame, the glory, the adoration. Our society's extreme fascination with stars that borders on obsession, it can't be healthy. And perhaps there are things we can take away from 'Jessie James', straight from the mouth of the coward himself. "He's just a human being," he tells us. "I was surprised by what happened. They didn't applaud." More reviews at rottentomatoes.com/vine/journal_view.php?journalid=219276&view=public

An outstanding piece of art!

tt0443680

This movie is amazing.It radiates with excellent performances and it's own unique geniousity.There is no flaw in this movie.The screenplay is great,acting is great,direction is great,acting is great,production is great,....I really can't find the flaw in it.All i can think of writing is what's good in it so i'll just say what's the best thing in my opinion...It's character developing.The character developing is masterfully written in screenplay and masterfully portraited by actor's,especially by Brad Pitt and Casey Afleck!The entire movie actually follow's the story of Robert Ford and his fear respectful obsession with Jesse James.Now as we can see at the beginning of the movie it's clearly that Jese is his personal hero.He believes that Jese is the best gunfighter ever and that frightens him since he asumes that Jese is gonna kill him and the rest of the gang so they couldn't turn him in.The same opinion the other's share.Anyway,Jesse takes him under his wing and that's when the real trouble start's because pretty soon Jesse start's to believe that they might try to kill him even though he still hold's on to his cold blooded look.To short the story...This movie is not a regular western movie like bam,bam everyones dead.No,this is as i already said a piece of art.Which means that it goes really,really slow.It's mostly based on the mental condition of Robert and the rest of the gang since they assume that the best gunman ever is planing on killing them.They start to panic,they can't sleep,they always threat each other's,...and so on....Another great thing is that you don't really know,until the end is Jesse really trying to kill them all or not.That's one of the many thing's that will keep you on the chair through this movie.I watched this movie for like thousand times already and it's a masterpiece if you ask me.However it's not for everyone.Just like There Will Be Blood for example.It's the same kind of movie.If you like one of them,you like both of them.Anyway to end with my comment on this movie i will just say that i think that it's a movie that has to be watched,if not for the movie it self then because of the cast!Enjoy!!!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-280

ur19275800

title: An outstanding piece of art! review: This movie is amazing.It radiates with excellent performances and it's own unique geniousity.There is no flaw in this movie.The screenplay is great,acting is great,direction is great,acting is great,production is great,....I really can't find the flaw in it.All i can think of writing is what's good in it so i'll just say what's the best thing in my opinion...It's character developing.The character developing is masterfully written in screenplay and masterfully portraited by actor's,especially by Brad Pitt and Casey Afleck!The entire movie actually follow's the story of Robert Ford and his fear respectful obsession with Jesse James.Now as we can see at the beginning of the movie it's clearly that Jese is his personal hero.He believes that Jese is the best gunfighter ever and that frightens him since he asumes that Jese is gonna kill him and the rest of the gang so they couldn't turn him in.The same opinion the other's share.Anyway,Jesse takes him under his wing and that's when the real trouble start's because pretty soon Jesse start's to believe that they might try to kill him even though he still hold's on to his cold blooded look.To short the story...This movie is not a regular western movie like bam,bam everyones dead.No,this is as i already said a piece of art.Which means that it goes really,really slow.It's mostly based on the mental condition of Robert and the rest of the gang since they assume that the best gunman ever is planing on killing them.They start to panic,they can't sleep,they always threat each other's,...and so on....Another great thing is that you don't really know,until the end is Jesse really trying to kill them all or not.That's one of the many thing's that will keep you on the chair through this movie.I watched this movie for like thousand times already and it's a masterpiece if you ask me.However it's not for everyone.Just like There Will Be Blood for example.It's the same kind of movie.If you like one of them,you like both of them.Anyway to end with my comment on this movie i will just say that i think that it's a movie that has to be watched,if not for the movie it self then because of the cast!Enjoy!!!

A visually sumptuous Western bio-myth...

tt0443680

..."The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" is Aussie auteur Andrew "Chopper" Dominik's sophomore effort, and a fine one it is thanks to an intelligent, compelling screenplay, strong production values, and top-rank acting all around. Though shot in Canada, the film captures late 19th century America with a painter's vision. The photography by the esteemed Roger "Sid and Nancy" Deakins veers at times into the territory of exquisite, especially in conjunction with the powerful score by Nick "Birthday Party" Cave and Warren "The Road" Ellis. The story centers on the odd relationship of the title characters: the one a charismatic bandit, a family man on the run, the other an idolatrous youth who becomes far more invested in his anti-hero than he ever imagined. Brad "You have to ask?" Pitt portrays James with suitable gravitas and sympathy, while Casey "Soul Survivors" Affleck surmounts the obvious age disparity between himself and the character he plays with a fully nuanced performance that simultaneously attracts and repels, easily earning his Oscar nomination for the role. The supporting cast is strong as well, notably in the persons of Sam "Galaxy Quest" Rockwell as Charlie Ford, Garret "Deadwood" Dillahunt as Ed Miller, and Paul "Elizabethtown" Schneider as Dick Liddil. Sadly, Mary-Louise "Grand Canyon" Parker is mostly wasted as James' wife, and Zooey "Almost Famous" Deschanel likewise as a minor character. Of even greater interest to me was the definite suggestion that James recognized Ford as the agent of his own conflicted suicidal tendencies. Opinions I've read elsewhere of a homo-erotic subtext between the two characters are, I think, unwarranted. Regardless, "...Jesse James..." is cinematic art of a high order, despite its novelistic, episodic nature (c.f. the voice-over and various flashbacks), and highly recommended by this reviewer.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-264

ur0431565

title: A visually sumptuous Western bio-myth... review: ..."The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" is Aussie auteur Andrew "Chopper" Dominik's sophomore effort, and a fine one it is thanks to an intelligent, compelling screenplay, strong production values, and top-rank acting all around. Though shot in Canada, the film captures late 19th century America with a painter's vision. The photography by the esteemed Roger "Sid and Nancy" Deakins veers at times into the territory of exquisite, especially in conjunction with the powerful score by Nick "Birthday Party" Cave and Warren "The Road" Ellis. The story centers on the odd relationship of the title characters: the one a charismatic bandit, a family man on the run, the other an idolatrous youth who becomes far more invested in his anti-hero than he ever imagined. Brad "You have to ask?" Pitt portrays James with suitable gravitas and sympathy, while Casey "Soul Survivors" Affleck surmounts the obvious age disparity between himself and the character he plays with a fully nuanced performance that simultaneously attracts and repels, easily earning his Oscar nomination for the role. The supporting cast is strong as well, notably in the persons of Sam "Galaxy Quest" Rockwell as Charlie Ford, Garret "Deadwood" Dillahunt as Ed Miller, and Paul "Elizabethtown" Schneider as Dick Liddil. Sadly, Mary-Louise "Grand Canyon" Parker is mostly wasted as James' wife, and Zooey "Almost Famous" Deschanel likewise as a minor character. Of even greater interest to me was the definite suggestion that James recognized Ford as the agent of his own conflicted suicidal tendencies. Opinions I've read elsewhere of a homo-erotic subtext between the two characters are, I think, unwarranted. Regardless, "...Jesse James..." is cinematic art of a high order, despite its novelistic, episodic nature (c.f. the voice-over and various flashbacks), and highly recommended by this reviewer.

Too Long And Too Muddled, But Great Characters

tt0443680

THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD is a perplexing film in scope, subject, and style.The first thing that hits most people is the title. I mean, how long does a film's title have to be? Although I understand WHY they settled on it, I still feel that alternatives must've been out there.The next is the length of the movie itself. At over 2 hours and 40 minutes, it's a behemoth in terms of size. I understand, too, that the original uncut version was a bit over 4 hours. Four hours! Thank goodness they cut it down. But I feel more cuts were needed and a better direction taken with the movie as a whole.The biggest issue I have is that the entire production seemed to have difficulties deciding on who the main character was. Was it Robert Ford (Casey Affleck, GONE BABY GONE)? Or was it Jesse James (Brad Pitt, BABEL)? You can, on occasion, have multiple main characters, but with this film the muddling of who was doing what to who and why got seriously confusing. I attributed this to the fact that half the time we were focused on Jesse and the other half on Robert. The problems this caused was a lack of consistent story flow and a lengthy film that could've easily held more interest if it would've focused on either one character or the other. Personally, I would've liked to have seen the film start near Jesse James' assassination and then lead us off on the life of Robert Ford afterward. But that portion of Ford's life is quickly skimmed over and we never get the true feeling for what he went through after being labeled "the coward who shot Jesse James in the back." I also have to comment on the repetitive use of time-lapse photography during scenes meant to show the passage of time. The constant showing of clouds skidding rapidly across the sky got a bit tiring; time after time after time after time.Regardless of title and movie length, and the lack of a consistent character, the acting was pretty much perfect. Brad Pitt played the confused, dangerous, paranoid, and nearly psychotic Jesse James exceptionally well. And Casey Affleck as the disenchanted Jesse James fan-boy came across as creepy and not-just-a-bit pathetic.Although this film received plenty of praise (including two Oscar nominations), I found it to be slow and the first hour confusing with regards to understanding which character was doing what and why.But the acting saved it for me. Although I wouldn't necessarily recommend this flick for those who are ready to head off to bed (as this might put them to sleep before bedtime), I would suggest it as a good character study of the times surrounding the life of Jesse James and the poor sap who shot him.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-218

ur7704831

title: Too Long And Too Muddled, But Great Characters review: THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD is a perplexing film in scope, subject, and style.The first thing that hits most people is the title. I mean, how long does a film's title have to be? Although I understand WHY they settled on it, I still feel that alternatives must've been out there.The next is the length of the movie itself. At over 2 hours and 40 minutes, it's a behemoth in terms of size. I understand, too, that the original uncut version was a bit over 4 hours. Four hours! Thank goodness they cut it down. But I feel more cuts were needed and a better direction taken with the movie as a whole.The biggest issue I have is that the entire production seemed to have difficulties deciding on who the main character was. Was it Robert Ford (Casey Affleck, GONE BABY GONE)? Or was it Jesse James (Brad Pitt, BABEL)? You can, on occasion, have multiple main characters, but with this film the muddling of who was doing what to who and why got seriously confusing. I attributed this to the fact that half the time we were focused on Jesse and the other half on Robert. The problems this caused was a lack of consistent story flow and a lengthy film that could've easily held more interest if it would've focused on either one character or the other. Personally, I would've liked to have seen the film start near Jesse James' assassination and then lead us off on the life of Robert Ford afterward. But that portion of Ford's life is quickly skimmed over and we never get the true feeling for what he went through after being labeled "the coward who shot Jesse James in the back." I also have to comment on the repetitive use of time-lapse photography during scenes meant to show the passage of time. The constant showing of clouds skidding rapidly across the sky got a bit tiring; time after time after time after time.Regardless of title and movie length, and the lack of a consistent character, the acting was pretty much perfect. Brad Pitt played the confused, dangerous, paranoid, and nearly psychotic Jesse James exceptionally well. And Casey Affleck as the disenchanted Jesse James fan-boy came across as creepy and not-just-a-bit pathetic.Although this film received plenty of praise (including two Oscar nominations), I found it to be slow and the first hour confusing with regards to understanding which character was doing what and why.But the acting saved it for me. Although I wouldn't necessarily recommend this flick for those who are ready to head off to bed (as this might put them to sleep before bedtime), I would suggest it as a good character study of the times surrounding the life of Jesse James and the poor sap who shot him.

The old west was a complicated time

tt0443680

I am willing to bet that the end of the movie is given away in the title in large part because the relationship between Jesse James and the coward Robert Ford is so complex, and James himself so unpredictable, that there is still tension on the way to an ending that we know is coming. Then again, it's also true that not only is the assassination not the end of the movie, and the tension created by violence that we can see coming is, in most ways, more real and more satisfying than even realistic violence, such as can be scene in one particular scene in the recent Collateral when (note a possible spoiler here for that movie) when Mark Ruffalo's character Fanny is so unexpectedly shot.The first thing that struck me about this film was that it is much more stylized than the westerns that I have seen. It's difficult to make wide expanses of empty frontier look anything less than beautiful in an almost mythic way, but the time lapse photography and occasional textured shots of a brooding Jesse James (sort of like a film version of the movie's cover) give the film an almost futuristic feel, which is an odd but pleasing sensation to have in a movie that takes place in the late 1800s. We meet the infamous James gang as they are planning to get out of the criminal world at the height of their game. It strikes me as a time when the mostly agrarian American society was so in need of a hero that they, in many ways, accepted a man who was famous for robbing the very people that deified him. He did seem to have some of the characteristics of Robin Hood, but not many. Mostly, we can identify with him because he is clearly a good father who loves his kids, and for some reason even a brutal killer can gain sympathy from modern audiences for being good to his kids. He is also shown as a loving husband, but one can only speculate on how far his loyalty to his wife goes when he is away from his family for so long.Enter Robert Ford, played with striking effectiveness by Casey Affleck, who has appeared in an impressive list of films in his relatively short career, and now is credited above Brad Pitt. Not a bad career move! He has a fascinating story, not the least part of which is that his wife is the sister of the legendary River Phoenix and the also legendary Joaquin Phoenix. Casey has never been much of a leading man, and it is exactly that fact that makes him a perfect Robert Ford.Some have suggested a homo-erotic lust towards James from Ford, and while I wouldn't go so far as to call it lust, his hero-worship of James certainly permeates his life completely, and the assassination strikes me not as the most intimate that Ford can be with Jesse without sex, but rather, as a sort of If I can't have you, no one will. Although still, I don't see anything sexual at all in their relationship, but rather a lashing out of Ford, who so desperately wants to be accepted by Jesse that, after consistently failing, he resorts to killing him, the less painful of his two remaining options (the other being acceptance of his inherent inferiority and subsequent expulsion from the gang or permanent subservience). The other way that the story presents a surprising level of complexity is after the assassination, where Ford receives the fame that he always wanted and, for some expected and some unexpected reasons, becomes truly miserable. It is a strange exploration of the media's and the public's glorification of violence, as a man who terrorized the public is seen as a fallen icon and the man who killed him is branded a murderer. It seems that Ford's mistake is in so publicly glorifying himself, reenacting the killing in front of live audiences, eventually being heckled by the crowds for being a coward. The problem that he doesn't realize is that the public doesn't understand the relationship between James and Ford, which was always uncomfortable, even as Ford tried so hard to sidle up to James and be accepted as his "sidekick." When the assassination happens, James knows it, and so does Ford and so do we. The audiences watching the reenactment only saw Ford shoot James from behind, not really knowing that James knew it was going to happen and allowed it. Maybe even welcomed it. At just under 3 hours the movie is a bit long, but it is also a modern western epic, and there aren't very many of those. This movie will invariably be compared to other recent westerns, such as the astonishingly good 3:10 to Yuma, one of the best and most redeeming westerns I've seen in years. Like that movie, this one also has a spectacular cast who inhabit their roles and give us a look at the old west in a way that I didn't know was possible anymore. It seems that the western genre is coming back to life

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-182

ur0562732

title: The old west was a complicated time review: I am willing to bet that the end of the movie is given away in the title in large part because the relationship between Jesse James and the coward Robert Ford is so complex, and James himself so unpredictable, that there is still tension on the way to an ending that we know is coming. Then again, it's also true that not only is the assassination not the end of the movie, and the tension created by violence that we can see coming is, in most ways, more real and more satisfying than even realistic violence, such as can be scene in one particular scene in the recent Collateral when (note a possible spoiler here for that movie) when Mark Ruffalo's character Fanny is so unexpectedly shot.The first thing that struck me about this film was that it is much more stylized than the westerns that I have seen. It's difficult to make wide expanses of empty frontier look anything less than beautiful in an almost mythic way, but the time lapse photography and occasional textured shots of a brooding Jesse James (sort of like a film version of the movie's cover) give the film an almost futuristic feel, which is an odd but pleasing sensation to have in a movie that takes place in the late 1800s. We meet the infamous James gang as they are planning to get out of the criminal world at the height of their game. It strikes me as a time when the mostly agrarian American society was so in need of a hero that they, in many ways, accepted a man who was famous for robbing the very people that deified him. He did seem to have some of the characteristics of Robin Hood, but not many. Mostly, we can identify with him because he is clearly a good father who loves his kids, and for some reason even a brutal killer can gain sympathy from modern audiences for being good to his kids. He is also shown as a loving husband, but one can only speculate on how far his loyalty to his wife goes when he is away from his family for so long.Enter Robert Ford, played with striking effectiveness by Casey Affleck, who has appeared in an impressive list of films in his relatively short career, and now is credited above Brad Pitt. Not a bad career move! He has a fascinating story, not the least part of which is that his wife is the sister of the legendary River Phoenix and the also legendary Joaquin Phoenix. Casey has never been much of a leading man, and it is exactly that fact that makes him a perfect Robert Ford.Some have suggested a homo-erotic lust towards James from Ford, and while I wouldn't go so far as to call it lust, his hero-worship of James certainly permeates his life completely, and the assassination strikes me not as the most intimate that Ford can be with Jesse without sex, but rather, as a sort of If I can't have you, no one will. Although still, I don't see anything sexual at all in their relationship, but rather a lashing out of Ford, who so desperately wants to be accepted by Jesse that, after consistently failing, he resorts to killing him, the less painful of his two remaining options (the other being acceptance of his inherent inferiority and subsequent expulsion from the gang or permanent subservience). The other way that the story presents a surprising level of complexity is after the assassination, where Ford receives the fame that he always wanted and, for some expected and some unexpected reasons, becomes truly miserable. It is a strange exploration of the media's and the public's glorification of violence, as a man who terrorized the public is seen as a fallen icon and the man who killed him is branded a murderer. It seems that Ford's mistake is in so publicly glorifying himself, reenacting the killing in front of live audiences, eventually being heckled by the crowds for being a coward. The problem that he doesn't realize is that the public doesn't understand the relationship between James and Ford, which was always uncomfortable, even as Ford tried so hard to sidle up to James and be accepted as his "sidekick." When the assassination happens, James knows it, and so does Ford and so do we. The audiences watching the reenactment only saw Ford shoot James from behind, not really knowing that James knew it was going to happen and allowed it. Maybe even welcomed it. At just under 3 hours the movie is a bit long, but it is also a modern western epic, and there aren't very many of those. This movie will invariably be compared to other recent westerns, such as the astonishingly good 3:10 to Yuma, one of the best and most redeeming westerns I've seen in years. Like that movie, this one also has a spectacular cast who inhabit their roles and give us a look at the old west in a way that I didn't know was possible anymore. It seems that the western genre is coming back to life

From envy, admiration and worse

tt0443680

This is not the classic western. If anybody had ever asked what were the motives that led to Robert Ford to commit the murder of Jesse James, this movie is the answer. This isn't the story of a murder is the story of an introverted, fearful, nervous, somewhat gay, silent and little smart man that admired another man who was quite the opposite and that once this admiration wasn't reciprocated, like Robert Ford had wanted, then came hatred, revenge, resentment because he wasn't, not like Jesse James, but Jesse James itself.This film is an analysis of how admiration for a person becomes an obsession to be what we are not (this story reminded me somewhat of The Talented Mr. Ripley) Does Robert Ford wants to be as Jesse James? The answer is no, basically story shows us that Ford was looking for what Jesse represented, an admiration by the people, an applause, but what he found was exactly the opposite by not realize that the only real applause isn't from cowardice, or vile acts, but it is to exploit what we are, what makes us be us.This story whose message transcends beyond an historic landmark is also gratifying for any person who likes movie due to its technical details are extremely impressive, it is necessary to highlight the photo, that undoubtedly, they choose a number of perfectly frames that get making plastic each scene, at times actually seems we are seeing a painting by the way in which natural light becomes an essential element. Just include the value that music gives the scenes since served as a catalyst for emotions to give a touch more melancholic to some moments.Perhaps the only things that could bring as defects are the abuse of the blur effect in the lens only to highlight what is at the center of the image, and the rhythm a bit slow but justified wonderfully with the editing and photography. In short this is a really beautiful film.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-250

ur12717855

title: From envy, admiration and worse review: This is not the classic western. If anybody had ever asked what were the motives that led to Robert Ford to commit the murder of Jesse James, this movie is the answer. This isn't the story of a murder is the story of an introverted, fearful, nervous, somewhat gay, silent and little smart man that admired another man who was quite the opposite and that once this admiration wasn't reciprocated, like Robert Ford had wanted, then came hatred, revenge, resentment because he wasn't, not like Jesse James, but Jesse James itself.This film is an analysis of how admiration for a person becomes an obsession to be what we are not (this story reminded me somewhat of The Talented Mr. Ripley) Does Robert Ford wants to be as Jesse James? The answer is no, basically story shows us that Ford was looking for what Jesse represented, an admiration by the people, an applause, but what he found was exactly the opposite by not realize that the only real applause isn't from cowardice, or vile acts, but it is to exploit what we are, what makes us be us.This story whose message transcends beyond an historic landmark is also gratifying for any person who likes movie due to its technical details are extremely impressive, it is necessary to highlight the photo, that undoubtedly, they choose a number of perfectly frames that get making plastic each scene, at times actually seems we are seeing a painting by the way in which natural light becomes an essential element. Just include the value that music gives the scenes since served as a catalyst for emotions to give a touch more melancholic to some moments.Perhaps the only things that could bring as defects are the abuse of the blur effect in the lens only to highlight what is at the center of the image, and the rhythm a bit slow but justified wonderfully with the editing and photography. In short this is a really beautiful film.

A beautiful western

tt0443680

Another good Western to come out in 2007, along with 'Yuma', though this one is slower paced and more of a drama. In any case, the movie has great acting, beautiful direction, and a superb score. Affleck truly deserves the supporting actor nomination...(read more). The year 2007 will always be remembered on his resume' as a career defining one, after performing well in 'Gone Baby Gone'.There are two things that hurt this movie; the length could have been easily reduced and it is probably what hurt it when it came to awards considerations and attracting crowds. Yes a lot of time was taken with expressions and landscape shots, however there was still room to shorten it up considerably. The second drawback of the movie was its long and spoiler of a title. It obviously gives the story away, not just by saying what will happen, but also by who. Had the title been more subtle, simply 'Jesse James' perhaps, the movie would have been unpredictable and more suspenseful.However, this is a solid movie, worth watching for Western fans. This movie probably rates as my 3rd favorite Western after 'The Proposition' and '3:10 to Yuma'.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-119

ur12939701

title: A beautiful western review: Another good Western to come out in 2007, along with 'Yuma', though this one is slower paced and more of a drama. In any case, the movie has great acting, beautiful direction, and a superb score. Affleck truly deserves the supporting actor nomination...(read more). The year 2007 will always be remembered on his resume' as a career defining one, after performing well in 'Gone Baby Gone'.There are two things that hurt this movie; the length could have been easily reduced and it is probably what hurt it when it came to awards considerations and attracting crowds. Yes a lot of time was taken with expressions and landscape shots, however there was still room to shorten it up considerably. The second drawback of the movie was its long and spoiler of a title. It obviously gives the story away, not just by saying what will happen, but also by who. Had the title been more subtle, simply 'Jesse James' perhaps, the movie would have been unpredictable and more suspenseful.However, this is a solid movie, worth watching for Western fans. This movie probably rates as my 3rd favorite Western after 'The Proposition' and '3:10 to Yuma'.

The Legend of Bob Ford

tt0443680

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007) A newspaper man in an old John Ford film once proclaimed that when legend becomes fact, you oughta print the legend. Well, they've been printing the legend of Jesse James now for over a hundred years. He's been a Robin Hood at times, a cold blooded killer others. It's the old wild west conundrum: for every tale of outlaw heroism is a tale for outlaw ruthlessness.And now here's a tale that is as decidedly conflicted as the legends themselves. In Andrew Dominic's The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Jesse James is no hero, even shown to kill a man in the same manner that supposedly made Ford a coward. But at the same time, James is also shown to be a doting and loving husband and father. His paranoia has made him ruthless. Though he does now have his reasons to be to be paranoid, its that very paranoia which has alienated those around him.The picture seeks to dissect the legend, not necessarily to get to the facts, but the essence of reality. In a way, it's striving for what Werner Herzog calls ecstatic truth. Though that's not necessarily aimed at James himself, but his assassin, Bob Ford. Yes, that is the legend that is most steeped in hyperbole.Was Ford a coward? The title would lead you to be believe such, but that's the irony. If there has ever been a more matter of fact title, I've not heard it. Some of said the title says it all in this case, but nothing could be further from the truth.Casey Affleck steals the show in his portrayal of Robert Ford, the young man who idolized, then feared, and finally assassinated Jesse James. He gives a mannered but electrifying performance. Brad Pitt portrays Jesse James as a contemplative but quietly menacing man, troubled by his increasing ruthlessness. Sam Rockwell plays close James friend, and brother to Bob, Charlie Ford. Elsewhere, in one of my favourite performances of the film, Paul Schneider plays the outlaw and notorious womanizer Dick Liddel. It's a film full of excellent performances, though none match that of Affleck's.The plot is lingering and lyrical. When the film debuted it played in a four hour version (there have been rumblings about a future release of this version, but other than a few select screenings there have been no solid leads). The picture goes off in different directions, with the ultimate aim of eventually coming back together, but without force or haste.The film opens with a train robbery, the last of older brother Frank James (Sam Shepard) who is weary of Bob. But Jesse takes him along, not so much because he trusts him, but perhaps because he enjoys the flattery of Bob's idolization. Eventually Jesse begins knocking off those who he suspects of going against him. Dick Liddel has been teamed up with another team member working on their own scores. Although he is close with the Fords, he reminds Bob at bullet proof not to betray him.Wood Hite (Jeremy Renner), Jesse's cousin, shows up at the Ford home one snowy winter day. Hite has it out for Liddel, who's living there, after he slept with his father's young new wife. Hite storms the bedroom and he and Dick shoot it out. Just as Hite has Liddel in his sights, Bob pulls the trigger. They must hide that Wood has been killed, knowing that Jesse would kill them for sure now. Slowly, fearfully, and regretfully, the Ford's are enlisted to conspire Jesse's arrest. Only after they it absolutely dire does Bob commit his infamous deed. Though we know it's coming before we even enter the theatre, the assassination scene's grace and poignancy are unexpected. And the way Jesse meets his end prods existential queries. Throughout the film action is frequently narrated in a calm manner by Hugh Ross, often simply telling us in words what is happening in screen. Where in many films that may seem trite, here it feels uniquely transcendental.Director Dominic is not satisfied to simply dissect the legend. The film is, quite frankly, one of the most stunningly beautiful films in recent years. Dominic and Roger Deakens capture the action with an unabashedly artistic eye. Chilling sky blues blend with the golden wheat of Alberta, evoking the aesthetic qualities of Days of Heaven. That film was admittedly a huge influence on the visual style of the picture. Dominic not only shot the film in the same fields, but hired the same costume designer (Patricia Norris). To top off the stunning look and mood of the film is Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' beautiful score. Cave is proving himself not only an immensely talented singer-songwriter, but a wonderful composer as well.If there is one word to describe The Assassination of Jesse James, it is undoubtedly beautiful. Which is not to say that it's all look: the substance is also quite remarkable. The film held me in its grip for every minute of its length. Though I have not read the source material, the storyline and approach to the legends of Jesse James and Bob Ford I suspect owes much to the book. Much of the narration sounds like it may have been taken verbatim from the book.This is a highly ambitious film, and one that I will unreservedly stand behind. There are usually only a few films that hint at a lasting reputation for greatness. I think this is one of them, and that will be recognized in time. And I'll stand by that.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-269

ur6267301

title: The Legend of Bob Ford review: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007) A newspaper man in an old John Ford film once proclaimed that when legend becomes fact, you oughta print the legend. Well, they've been printing the legend of Jesse James now for over a hundred years. He's been a Robin Hood at times, a cold blooded killer others. It's the old wild west conundrum: for every tale of outlaw heroism is a tale for outlaw ruthlessness.And now here's a tale that is as decidedly conflicted as the legends themselves. In Andrew Dominic's The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Jesse James is no hero, even shown to kill a man in the same manner that supposedly made Ford a coward. But at the same time, James is also shown to be a doting and loving husband and father. His paranoia has made him ruthless. Though he does now have his reasons to be to be paranoid, its that very paranoia which has alienated those around him.The picture seeks to dissect the legend, not necessarily to get to the facts, but the essence of reality. In a way, it's striving for what Werner Herzog calls ecstatic truth. Though that's not necessarily aimed at James himself, but his assassin, Bob Ford. Yes, that is the legend that is most steeped in hyperbole.Was Ford a coward? The title would lead you to be believe such, but that's the irony. If there has ever been a more matter of fact title, I've not heard it. Some of said the title says it all in this case, but nothing could be further from the truth.Casey Affleck steals the show in his portrayal of Robert Ford, the young man who idolized, then feared, and finally assassinated Jesse James. He gives a mannered but electrifying performance. Brad Pitt portrays Jesse James as a contemplative but quietly menacing man, troubled by his increasing ruthlessness. Sam Rockwell plays close James friend, and brother to Bob, Charlie Ford. Elsewhere, in one of my favourite performances of the film, Paul Schneider plays the outlaw and notorious womanizer Dick Liddel. It's a film full of excellent performances, though none match that of Affleck's.The plot is lingering and lyrical. When the film debuted it played in a four hour version (there have been rumblings about a future release of this version, but other than a few select screenings there have been no solid leads). The picture goes off in different directions, with the ultimate aim of eventually coming back together, but without force or haste.The film opens with a train robbery, the last of older brother Frank James (Sam Shepard) who is weary of Bob. But Jesse takes him along, not so much because he trusts him, but perhaps because he enjoys the flattery of Bob's idolization. Eventually Jesse begins knocking off those who he suspects of going against him. Dick Liddel has been teamed up with another team member working on their own scores. Although he is close with the Fords, he reminds Bob at bullet proof not to betray him.Wood Hite (Jeremy Renner), Jesse's cousin, shows up at the Ford home one snowy winter day. Hite has it out for Liddel, who's living there, after he slept with his father's young new wife. Hite storms the bedroom and he and Dick shoot it out. Just as Hite has Liddel in his sights, Bob pulls the trigger. They must hide that Wood has been killed, knowing that Jesse would kill them for sure now. Slowly, fearfully, and regretfully, the Ford's are enlisted to conspire Jesse's arrest. Only after they it absolutely dire does Bob commit his infamous deed. Though we know it's coming before we even enter the theatre, the assassination scene's grace and poignancy are unexpected. And the way Jesse meets his end prods existential queries. Throughout the film action is frequently narrated in a calm manner by Hugh Ross, often simply telling us in words what is happening in screen. Where in many films that may seem trite, here it feels uniquely transcendental.Director Dominic is not satisfied to simply dissect the legend. The film is, quite frankly, one of the most stunningly beautiful films in recent years. Dominic and Roger Deakens capture the action with an unabashedly artistic eye. Chilling sky blues blend with the golden wheat of Alberta, evoking the aesthetic qualities of Days of Heaven. That film was admittedly a huge influence on the visual style of the picture. Dominic not only shot the film in the same fields, but hired the same costume designer (Patricia Norris). To top off the stunning look and mood of the film is Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' beautiful score. Cave is proving himself not only an immensely talented singer-songwriter, but a wonderful composer as well.If there is one word to describe The Assassination of Jesse James, it is undoubtedly beautiful. Which is not to say that it's all look: the substance is also quite remarkable. The film held me in its grip for every minute of its length. Though I have not read the source material, the storyline and approach to the legends of Jesse James and Bob Ford I suspect owes much to the book. Much of the narration sounds like it may have been taken verbatim from the book.This is a highly ambitious film, and one that I will unreservedly stand behind. There are usually only a few films that hint at a lasting reputation for greatness. I think this is one of them, and that will be recognized in time. And I'll stand by that.

The Expectation of Applause

tt0443680

"The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" is a handsomely mounted, film-school like study of the last days of the infamous James' Gang by director Andrew Dominik. Growing up in awe of Jesse James (Brad Pitt), Robert Ford (Casey Affleck) finally gets to live out his dream of living side by side with his idol when his brother, Charles (Sam Rockwell) joins the gang. Young Robert quickly learns that the exploits of the murderous train-robbers are far from the exciting flights of fancy he grew up reading about in newspapers and dime-store novels. A series of cowardly acts in the wake of double-crossings and humiliations ultimately lead to the titular event.The style of the film is often visually arresting and downright disturbing, especially in the acts of violence, which leave the most gruesome parts slightly off camera, but are frequently shot and framed in such a way as to maximize shock value and leave an uncomfortable feeling of tension in the theater seats. Dominik sometimes relies too heavily on voice-over narration torn straight from the book upon which the film is based leaving us to assume that aside from dreadfully beautiful photography of passing clouds and desolate Midwestern landscapes, he wasn't always sure how he visually wanted to tell the story. This leads to a sometimes snails' pace as the plot unfolds, though the haunting Oscar-worthy cinematography from Roger Deakins and mesmerizing music score from Nick Cave and Warren Ellis eventually get under your skin even as the hands of the clock seem to move slower as if stuck in a pretty photograph of a nightmare.The acting in the film is superb from all involved. However, the performances often blur the line between caricatured scenery-chewing and emotional nuance (especially from Pitt and Rockwell). While there is some entertainment to be found in the lighter scenes of camaraderie amongst the gang members, the audience never really feels anything for the characters aside from sharing their sense of paranoia and fear knowing that around any corner someone will be betrayed and shot. The film also suffers from some scene stealing cameos from James Carville as the governor hell-bent on catching Jesse and the otherwise lovely Zooey Deschanel, who appears out of nowhere for a few moments about ten minutes after the film should have rightfully ended.When the credits finally rolled, I wasn't sure what to make of the film. There's some unforgettable imagery (my personal favorite being the almost surreal depiction of the cloth-masked robbers waiting in the dark woods as the train comes roaring down the tracks), and many commendable artistic elements to be found in the film. If the idea was to leave the audience feeling the era showcased was a tension-riddled and violently lonely existence, then the film succeeded wonderfully. Those seeking a more pure entertainment will most assuredly be left stressed and stretched to their limits.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-22

ur1069062

title: The Expectation of Applause review: "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" is a handsomely mounted, film-school like study of the last days of the infamous James' Gang by director Andrew Dominik. Growing up in awe of Jesse James (Brad Pitt), Robert Ford (Casey Affleck) finally gets to live out his dream of living side by side with his idol when his brother, Charles (Sam Rockwell) joins the gang. Young Robert quickly learns that the exploits of the murderous train-robbers are far from the exciting flights of fancy he grew up reading about in newspapers and dime-store novels. A series of cowardly acts in the wake of double-crossings and humiliations ultimately lead to the titular event.The style of the film is often visually arresting and downright disturbing, especially in the acts of violence, which leave the most gruesome parts slightly off camera, but are frequently shot and framed in such a way as to maximize shock value and leave an uncomfortable feeling of tension in the theater seats. Dominik sometimes relies too heavily on voice-over narration torn straight from the book upon which the film is based leaving us to assume that aside from dreadfully beautiful photography of passing clouds and desolate Midwestern landscapes, he wasn't always sure how he visually wanted to tell the story. This leads to a sometimes snails' pace as the plot unfolds, though the haunting Oscar-worthy cinematography from Roger Deakins and mesmerizing music score from Nick Cave and Warren Ellis eventually get under your skin even as the hands of the clock seem to move slower as if stuck in a pretty photograph of a nightmare.The acting in the film is superb from all involved. However, the performances often blur the line between caricatured scenery-chewing and emotional nuance (especially from Pitt and Rockwell). While there is some entertainment to be found in the lighter scenes of camaraderie amongst the gang members, the audience never really feels anything for the characters aside from sharing their sense of paranoia and fear knowing that around any corner someone will be betrayed and shot. The film also suffers from some scene stealing cameos from James Carville as the governor hell-bent on catching Jesse and the otherwise lovely Zooey Deschanel, who appears out of nowhere for a few moments about ten minutes after the film should have rightfully ended.When the credits finally rolled, I wasn't sure what to make of the film. There's some unforgettable imagery (my personal favorite being the almost surreal depiction of the cloth-masked robbers waiting in the dark woods as the train comes roaring down the tracks), and many commendable artistic elements to be found in the film. If the idea was to leave the audience feeling the era showcased was a tension-riddled and violently lonely existence, then the film succeeded wonderfully. Those seeking a more pure entertainment will most assuredly be left stressed and stretched to their limits.

That dirty little Coward, what shot Mr. Howard, put Jesse James in his grave

tt0443680

My mother, who was from Missouri, used to sing that song. Except she'd get the words wrong, but it was a testimony to how much of a legend Jesse James was a century later. She was distantly related to the Youngers, who were the partners with the James gang.In any event, this movie portrays Robert Ford, the killer of Jesse James, as a disgruntled fan-boy who bought into the hero-worship of the dime novels, and was disappointed to find out his hero was really a garden variety psychopath.Still, there's a lot to recommend this movie, in how it recreates the world of 1880 Missouri. Brad Pitt is pretty good in the role of James, to where you aren't saying, "Hey, that's Brad Pitt." He disappears into the role completely. In fact, the only actor who did jump out at me as not sinking into the role was presidential adviser James Carville, who played the Governor who sanctioned James Murder.The movie drags in places, but it is a very compelling story. Affleck portrays Bob Howard in a very sympathetic way, pointing out that he had good reason to fear for his own life, that James was eliminating all of his associates.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-155

ur5348015

title: That dirty little Coward, what shot Mr. Howard, put Jesse James in his grave review: My mother, who was from Missouri, used to sing that song. Except she'd get the words wrong, but it was a testimony to how much of a legend Jesse James was a century later. She was distantly related to the Youngers, who were the partners with the James gang.In any event, this movie portrays Robert Ford, the killer of Jesse James, as a disgruntled fan-boy who bought into the hero-worship of the dime novels, and was disappointed to find out his hero was really a garden variety psychopath.Still, there's a lot to recommend this movie, in how it recreates the world of 1880 Missouri. Brad Pitt is pretty good in the role of James, to where you aren't saying, "Hey, that's Brad Pitt." He disappears into the role completely. In fact, the only actor who did jump out at me as not sinking into the role was presidential adviser James Carville, who played the Governor who sanctioned James Murder.The movie drags in places, but it is a very compelling story. Affleck portrays Bob Howard in a very sympathetic way, pointing out that he had good reason to fear for his own life, that James was eliminating all of his associates.

A Shakespearean tragedy with one of the finest performances in history.

tt0443680

Despite some pointless narration (and irrelevantly blurred editing during the scenes with this narration) and the complete mistreatment of one of the finest actresses of the decade, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is easily one of the finest modern films around and certainly one of the best of the year. It plays as a Shakespearean tragedy instead of an outlandish, action-filled western that one would expect when hearing the name Jesse James. Featuring some of the best performances of the decade, the film is a wonderful mix of subtle and emotional heartache with biting realistic tension and a beautifully flawed character that everyone can relate to in some way. Slowly the film builds a tension and knowing dissension towards the inevitable downfall of Mr. James. It's a heartbreaking story of one man trying to be remembered and another knowing a betrayal is quickly coming upon him.A contrast between the main characters Jesse James (Brad Pitt) and Robert Ford (Casey Affleck) is presented throughout and really shows the truth that Ford is exactly the same as James, just at an earlier stage in his life. Jesse was the youngest of three boys and rose above all of them to be the most renowned outlaw in American history. He murdered and stole, but gained nothing but respect and admiration from those who heard the stories of his crimes. Of course with all of this fame, and the bounty of men he's had work with him and in his trust, Jesse knew that a betrayal was soon coming. He averted one before, but he can see the end in sight and this time, he is welcoming it instead of trying to fight it.This portrayal of James is one of the many things that make this film so brilliant. He's a melancholy, brooding, bipolar and enraged mess. A man who knows the end is approaching, but has come to a point in his life where he doesn't see any reason to try and stop it. We see him for how he truly was, instead of the gun-slinging charismatic outlaw that James is constantly portrayed as time and time again. This deeply heartbreaking man is perfectly personified by Pitt's award-worthy performance. We see a side of the light, breezy Brad Pitt that I personally could never have imagined. He presents so much pain and anguish behind those steely blues, that my heart stopped every time he started intently with his eyes ever so lightly filling with tears.I have no hesitation in calling Robert Ford the most tragic character in cinematic history. He is the youngest of five brothers, and all day he gets picked on and disrespected so when he sees another man who's the youngest of a number of brothers, he begins to idolize him. When he finally gets the chance to meet his hero, and work alongside him, his tendency to give a bad first impression (albeit he is a bit eerie with his strong admiration of the James boys) leads to more humiliation from the man he considered to be everything he wanted to grow up into. Obviously this leads the young man into spite and bitter insecurity. He becomes a wreck, but in this state of depression he is able to finally realize his true feelings and express them to the world. Due to this, Bob begins to get more respect and fear from those around him, and the Sheriff decides to capitalize on this bitterness by enlisting Bob in a sort-of undercover mission to arrest James, though everyone knows there is no way to arrest the man. It can only end in the death of one of the men.Of course the title, and any kind of history book, reveals who the dead man is and Ford assumes that this will lead to him becoming a legend in the same way that Jesse was. An icon on the morally right side, instead of as a criminal. However he is gravely wrong and he's met with more disrespect and tales of him being the biggest coward in American history to match Jesse's status as the biggest and most respected criminal. James was an icon and Ford was just the snake in the grass who stabbed him in the back. This undoubtedly brings more depression to Robert; he killed his hero for fame and was forever remembered as a coward who betrayed an icon. And then another man gets the idea that Robert had; he was going to murder someone infamous in order to be remembered and with this second murder ends the tragedy that is Robert Ford's life. The man who wanted nothing more than to be Jesse James, and became his killer.Casey Affleck's performance is the stuff of cinematic legend. His dynamic brilliance, deeply emotional strength and powerful absorption into this fatally flawed character combine to create what is easily one of the best performances I've ever seen and quite simply the best performance of the year so far. I've been a fan of this underrated genius for a long time now, and this performance is his best by far and is sure to get him a lot of attention come awards season; I could even see an Oscar in his future. He completely steals the show from Pitt, who still turns in an excellent portrayal, and perfectly embodies a character who just breaks my heart. Casey creates such a nice demeanor and personality for this dangerously awkward young man that makes him one of the most complex and, as I said before, easily the most tragic character in the history of film in my eyes. A true revelation to modern acting and proof that when you get the right role in the right film, you can take it all the way to the top.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-31

ur9521536

title: A Shakespearean tragedy with one of the finest performances in history. review: Despite some pointless narration (and irrelevantly blurred editing during the scenes with this narration) and the complete mistreatment of one of the finest actresses of the decade, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is easily one of the finest modern films around and certainly one of the best of the year. It plays as a Shakespearean tragedy instead of an outlandish, action-filled western that one would expect when hearing the name Jesse James. Featuring some of the best performances of the decade, the film is a wonderful mix of subtle and emotional heartache with biting realistic tension and a beautifully flawed character that everyone can relate to in some way. Slowly the film builds a tension and knowing dissension towards the inevitable downfall of Mr. James. It's a heartbreaking story of one man trying to be remembered and another knowing a betrayal is quickly coming upon him.A contrast between the main characters Jesse James (Brad Pitt) and Robert Ford (Casey Affleck) is presented throughout and really shows the truth that Ford is exactly the same as James, just at an earlier stage in his life. Jesse was the youngest of three boys and rose above all of them to be the most renowned outlaw in American history. He murdered and stole, but gained nothing but respect and admiration from those who heard the stories of his crimes. Of course with all of this fame, and the bounty of men he's had work with him and in his trust, Jesse knew that a betrayal was soon coming. He averted one before, but he can see the end in sight and this time, he is welcoming it instead of trying to fight it.This portrayal of James is one of the many things that make this film so brilliant. He's a melancholy, brooding, bipolar and enraged mess. A man who knows the end is approaching, but has come to a point in his life where he doesn't see any reason to try and stop it. We see him for how he truly was, instead of the gun-slinging charismatic outlaw that James is constantly portrayed as time and time again. This deeply heartbreaking man is perfectly personified by Pitt's award-worthy performance. We see a side of the light, breezy Brad Pitt that I personally could never have imagined. He presents so much pain and anguish behind those steely blues, that my heart stopped every time he started intently with his eyes ever so lightly filling with tears.I have no hesitation in calling Robert Ford the most tragic character in cinematic history. He is the youngest of five brothers, and all day he gets picked on and disrespected so when he sees another man who's the youngest of a number of brothers, he begins to idolize him. When he finally gets the chance to meet his hero, and work alongside him, his tendency to give a bad first impression (albeit he is a bit eerie with his strong admiration of the James boys) leads to more humiliation from the man he considered to be everything he wanted to grow up into. Obviously this leads the young man into spite and bitter insecurity. He becomes a wreck, but in this state of depression he is able to finally realize his true feelings and express them to the world. Due to this, Bob begins to get more respect and fear from those around him, and the Sheriff decides to capitalize on this bitterness by enlisting Bob in a sort-of undercover mission to arrest James, though everyone knows there is no way to arrest the man. It can only end in the death of one of the men.Of course the title, and any kind of history book, reveals who the dead man is and Ford assumes that this will lead to him becoming a legend in the same way that Jesse was. An icon on the morally right side, instead of as a criminal. However he is gravely wrong and he's met with more disrespect and tales of him being the biggest coward in American history to match Jesse's status as the biggest and most respected criminal. James was an icon and Ford was just the snake in the grass who stabbed him in the back. This undoubtedly brings more depression to Robert; he killed his hero for fame and was forever remembered as a coward who betrayed an icon. And then another man gets the idea that Robert had; he was going to murder someone infamous in order to be remembered and with this second murder ends the tragedy that is Robert Ford's life. The man who wanted nothing more than to be Jesse James, and became his killer.Casey Affleck's performance is the stuff of cinematic legend. His dynamic brilliance, deeply emotional strength and powerful absorption into this fatally flawed character combine to create what is easily one of the best performances I've ever seen and quite simply the best performance of the year so far. I've been a fan of this underrated genius for a long time now, and this performance is his best by far and is sure to get him a lot of attention come awards season; I could even see an Oscar in his future. He completely steals the show from Pitt, who still turns in an excellent portrayal, and perfectly embodies a character who just breaks my heart. Casey creates such a nice demeanor and personality for this dangerously awkward young man that makes him one of the most complex and, as I said before, easily the most tragic character in the history of film in my eyes. A true revelation to modern acting and proof that when you get the right role in the right film, you can take it all the way to the top.

Slow and lengthy is the one obstacle in the way of masterpiece

tt0443680

Somewhere in the four plus hours of film that New Zealand director Andrew Dominik shot for "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" has to be a cut fully capable of winning an Oscar for Best Picture. This version, however, is not it, but it's beautifully filmed and supported by incredible acting. Length (157 minutes) and a few scenes that wander off just enough to deflate the plot's naturally thriving tension are the only hurdles too high for this underrated ensemble to jump.Based on Ron Hansen's book of the same title, "Jesse James" is a historical fiction account of the great American outlaw: the man, the myth, the legend (literally) -- Jesse James. It tells the story of how the young man Bob Ford, who would eventually come to kill him, joined the famous gang of bandits and how he came to commit the "cowardly" act that forever lived in infamy.Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck as the two titular characters form one of the more intriguing relationships on the screen. As the one huge name in the cast, Pitt is perfectly cast as James, a cold outlaw that creates tension by utilizing the fear of everyone around him. Affleck is the socially awkward Ford, who used to idolize James growing up. Now that he's become part of the gang, Ford's ideal image of his hero has been shattered. The transformation he goes through from being naive to pulling the trigger on James gives Affleck an incredible range to work with. He's simply under-appreciated in Hollywood or he's really selective.That's not to diminish, however, the talent around him. Sam Rockwell, Paul Schneider and Jeremy Renner have impressive chemistry as part of the James' brothers gang. The script provides great subtext for their characters, but each is capable of so many levels. One minute they're joking around and the next they're bullies or even killers.Lastly, cinematographer Roger Deakins does absolutely gorgeous things with the lighting of this film. From the onset there's the scene of the James gang waiting in the woods for a train they've obstructed to stop so they can loot it. The train's headlight shines through the trees as it moves and ripples over their hooded faces, elevating the anticipation of the first action sequence of the film. On the whole, "Assassination" has the look of a great cinematic tragedy. The assassination scene in particular is so visually memorable. All the deaths in the film, in fact, have that traumatic effect on the audience.Then there's length. Scenes just kind of get lost. The excellent ending really pulls you back in to the film and leaves a favorable impression, but many middle sections are too quiet despite the ever-growing tension caused by the inevitability of the film's conclusion. It's hard to believe there wasn't a way to edit this film to make it of both tolerable length and a bit more streamlined through the middle because this cast, crew and story is clearly worthy of more recognition for this first-class effort.~Steven CVisit my site at http://moviemusereviews.com

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-325

ur2496397

title: Slow and lengthy is the one obstacle in the way of masterpiece review: Somewhere in the four plus hours of film that New Zealand director Andrew Dominik shot for "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" has to be a cut fully capable of winning an Oscar for Best Picture. This version, however, is not it, but it's beautifully filmed and supported by incredible acting. Length (157 minutes) and a few scenes that wander off just enough to deflate the plot's naturally thriving tension are the only hurdles too high for this underrated ensemble to jump.Based on Ron Hansen's book of the same title, "Jesse James" is a historical fiction account of the great American outlaw: the man, the myth, the legend (literally) -- Jesse James. It tells the story of how the young man Bob Ford, who would eventually come to kill him, joined the famous gang of bandits and how he came to commit the "cowardly" act that forever lived in infamy.Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck as the two titular characters form one of the more intriguing relationships on the screen. As the one huge name in the cast, Pitt is perfectly cast as James, a cold outlaw that creates tension by utilizing the fear of everyone around him. Affleck is the socially awkward Ford, who used to idolize James growing up. Now that he's become part of the gang, Ford's ideal image of his hero has been shattered. The transformation he goes through from being naive to pulling the trigger on James gives Affleck an incredible range to work with. He's simply under-appreciated in Hollywood or he's really selective.That's not to diminish, however, the talent around him. Sam Rockwell, Paul Schneider and Jeremy Renner have impressive chemistry as part of the James' brothers gang. The script provides great subtext for their characters, but each is capable of so many levels. One minute they're joking around and the next they're bullies or even killers.Lastly, cinematographer Roger Deakins does absolutely gorgeous things with the lighting of this film. From the onset there's the scene of the James gang waiting in the woods for a train they've obstructed to stop so they can loot it. The train's headlight shines through the trees as it moves and ripples over their hooded faces, elevating the anticipation of the first action sequence of the film. On the whole, "Assassination" has the look of a great cinematic tragedy. The assassination scene in particular is so visually memorable. All the deaths in the film, in fact, have that traumatic effect on the audience.Then there's length. Scenes just kind of get lost. The excellent ending really pulls you back in to the film and leaves a favorable impression, but many middle sections are too quiet despite the ever-growing tension caused by the inevitability of the film's conclusion. It's hard to believe there wasn't a way to edit this film to make it of both tolerable length and a bit more streamlined through the middle because this cast, crew and story is clearly worthy of more recognition for this first-class effort.~Steven CVisit my site at http://moviemusereviews.com

Lighting and shadow, melancholy and pace.

tt0443680

Andrew Dominik's 2007-western is easily one of the most haunting and beautiful western-movies made. Casting Brad Pitt as Jesse James was an inspired choice; he is a haunted man, and Pitt nails his performance with maturity as his underpinned emotions makes it one of his finest performances so far - but even more impressive is Casey Affleck's Robert Ford, a performance worth an Academy Award. THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD is a movie so beautifully shot that every scene is a jaw-drop; carefully structured scenes carries the movie with enormous inspiration as the slow-paced story creates a astonishing craft from the narrated opening to the brilliantly pulled-off ending. The cinematography and Dominik's eye for art makes this a poetic and beautiful western-movie.This is a movie utterly focused on the beauty and romantic aspects of the Wild West, as it in the same time keeps its hands perfectly on its cold, gritty story. Eye-candy doesn't seem as the right word; but this is surely one of the best-looking westerns Hollywood has ever laid their eyes on.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-157

ur1732001

title: Lighting and shadow, melancholy and pace. review: Andrew Dominik's 2007-western is easily one of the most haunting and beautiful western-movies made. Casting Brad Pitt as Jesse James was an inspired choice; he is a haunted man, and Pitt nails his performance with maturity as his underpinned emotions makes it one of his finest performances so far - but even more impressive is Casey Affleck's Robert Ford, a performance worth an Academy Award. THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD is a movie so beautifully shot that every scene is a jaw-drop; carefully structured scenes carries the movie with enormous inspiration as the slow-paced story creates a astonishing craft from the narrated opening to the brilliantly pulled-off ending. The cinematography and Dominik's eye for art makes this a poetic and beautiful western-movie.This is a movie utterly focused on the beauty and romantic aspects of the Wild West, as it in the same time keeps its hands perfectly on its cold, gritty story. Eye-candy doesn't seem as the right word; but this is surely one of the best-looking westerns Hollywood has ever laid their eyes on.

a visual masterpiece

tt0443680

If "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" is to be believed, then surely hell hath no fury like an idol worshipper scorned. And if it isn't, well heck, a little yarn-spinning might not be entirely out of order in a movie that is, by its very nature, a lyrical, haunting and visually stunning elegy to the fabled Old West and the larger-than-life figures who inhabited it.The "idol," in this case, is Jesse James, the notorious outlaw who, even before his death in 1882 at the age of 34, had become a legend in his own time, famous the world over for the many highly publicized robberies and killings he committed all across the American heartland. Indeed, an entire cottage industry of highly romanticized literature (a sensationalized mixture of fact and fiction) had already sprung up around him and the other members of his gang (including his nearly-as-famous brother, Frank). One of those who not only gobbled up the mythology but absorbed it into his soul was a young, self-described "nobody" by the name of Robert Ford, who, at the age of nineteen, finally got the chance to not only meet his childhood hero in person, but to join up with him in what would turn out to be the bandit's final great train robbery. However, disillusionment can come mighty quickly when an idol is revealed to have feet of clay, and when Jesse didn't accord Robert the respect he felt he was entitled to, the one-time sycophant became the gunman's most dangerous nemesis - and the man who would eventually take his life."The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" is not a traditional shoot-'em-up action picture, but rather a long, deliberative and contemplative mood piece focused on the burdens of "celebrity" and on the need to be a "somebody" in the eyes of the public. In a beautifully understated performance, Brad Pitt portrays James as part ruthless killer and part raving paranoiac, a mentally unbalanced sadist who spends much of his time waging physical as well as psychological warfare on the men he feels have betrayed him (with good reason in some cases). Yet, Pitt allows moments of humanity and tenderness to seep through his otherwise buttoned-down, stoic demeanor. As Ford, Casey Affleck is the true revelation in this film, finding the root of this pipsqueak's incessant need for braggadocio in his low self-esteem and obsessive need for recognition from others. The irony is that Ford's version of "celebrity," when he finally achieves it, is quite different from that of Mr. James - even if their fates take eerily similar paths in the end. These two superb actors are matched in performance by Sam Rockwell, Jeremy Renner and Sam Sheperd, all of whom are excellent in their roles.Using Ron Hansen's novel as his source, writer/director Andrew Dominik has crafted a work that, aesthetically speaking, is nothing short of a cinematic masterpiece, a film in which virtually every shot can stand as its own work of art. Roger Deakins' brilliantly lit, softly filtered cinematography (reminiscent of the work in the similarly themed "The Grey Fox") lends an otherworldly quality to the film, perfect for bringing out the legendary nature of the material. And Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' beautiful and haunting score goes a long ways towards achieving that end as well.From first frame to last, "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Brown" draws the audience into its beautifully lit world of history and legend - and makes us a part of that world.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-191

ur0375636

title: a visual masterpiece review: If "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" is to be believed, then surely hell hath no fury like an idol worshipper scorned. And if it isn't, well heck, a little yarn-spinning might not be entirely out of order in a movie that is, by its very nature, a lyrical, haunting and visually stunning elegy to the fabled Old West and the larger-than-life figures who inhabited it.The "idol," in this case, is Jesse James, the notorious outlaw who, even before his death in 1882 at the age of 34, had become a legend in his own time, famous the world over for the many highly publicized robberies and killings he committed all across the American heartland. Indeed, an entire cottage industry of highly romanticized literature (a sensationalized mixture of fact and fiction) had already sprung up around him and the other members of his gang (including his nearly-as-famous brother, Frank). One of those who not only gobbled up the mythology but absorbed it into his soul was a young, self-described "nobody" by the name of Robert Ford, who, at the age of nineteen, finally got the chance to not only meet his childhood hero in person, but to join up with him in what would turn out to be the bandit's final great train robbery. However, disillusionment can come mighty quickly when an idol is revealed to have feet of clay, and when Jesse didn't accord Robert the respect he felt he was entitled to, the one-time sycophant became the gunman's most dangerous nemesis - and the man who would eventually take his life."The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" is not a traditional shoot-'em-up action picture, but rather a long, deliberative and contemplative mood piece focused on the burdens of "celebrity" and on the need to be a "somebody" in the eyes of the public. In a beautifully understated performance, Brad Pitt portrays James as part ruthless killer and part raving paranoiac, a mentally unbalanced sadist who spends much of his time waging physical as well as psychological warfare on the men he feels have betrayed him (with good reason in some cases). Yet, Pitt allows moments of humanity and tenderness to seep through his otherwise buttoned-down, stoic demeanor. As Ford, Casey Affleck is the true revelation in this film, finding the root of this pipsqueak's incessant need for braggadocio in his low self-esteem and obsessive need for recognition from others. The irony is that Ford's version of "celebrity," when he finally achieves it, is quite different from that of Mr. James - even if their fates take eerily similar paths in the end. These two superb actors are matched in performance by Sam Rockwell, Jeremy Renner and Sam Sheperd, all of whom are excellent in their roles.Using Ron Hansen's novel as his source, writer/director Andrew Dominik has crafted a work that, aesthetically speaking, is nothing short of a cinematic masterpiece, a film in which virtually every shot can stand as its own work of art. Roger Deakins' brilliantly lit, softly filtered cinematography (reminiscent of the work in the similarly themed "The Grey Fox") lends an otherworldly quality to the film, perfect for bringing out the legendary nature of the material. And Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' beautiful and haunting score goes a long ways towards achieving that end as well.From first frame to last, "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Brown" draws the audience into its beautifully lit world of history and legend - and makes us a part of that world.

Jesse James

tt0443680

Epoch Movies sometimes fall into a pit, where the mechanics of moving back in time has more to do with showing characters dressed in the days of old and portraying social poses than conveying a genuine epoch feeling. This is of course arguable since the spirit of a time now dead is impossible to show; but maybe it can be emulated, suggested more than defined - and of course, the more vague it gets the more dependent it becomes of the viewer's own predisposition do see it, understand it or "connect" to it. For me "Jesse James..." works at this level portraying with accuracy something both palpable and vague that transcends the curiosities, the costumes, the surface of what we see – the spirit rather than the materiality; very intimate, passionate and yet strangely detached. These were the men of the days that are gone. The awkwardness of those days bursts in the beginning, as a strange locomotive fills the the dark woods with light, and this synthesizes the overall mood for the picture: the direction, the cutting, the photography, the actors - and their meager lines -, are in a perfect unison.I remember "The Proposition" and the parallels that can be traced between (appart from Nick Cave): both movies use a similar visual technique, with long shots of the wilderness, small lines, subtle score and loose editing. The big difference is perhaps the voice over in "Jesse James...", a narrator that works almost like an historian and brings us closer to the characters and their inner feelings.Brad Pitt has good leading role – the best in the last years – looking a matured actor, and Casey Affleck has the first big opportunity to show what he's got – and he delivers.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-117

ur4951649

title: Jesse James review: Epoch Movies sometimes fall into a pit, where the mechanics of moving back in time has more to do with showing characters dressed in the days of old and portraying social poses than conveying a genuine epoch feeling. This is of course arguable since the spirit of a time now dead is impossible to show; but maybe it can be emulated, suggested more than defined - and of course, the more vague it gets the more dependent it becomes of the viewer's own predisposition do see it, understand it or "connect" to it. For me "Jesse James..." works at this level portraying with accuracy something both palpable and vague that transcends the curiosities, the costumes, the surface of what we see – the spirit rather than the materiality; very intimate, passionate and yet strangely detached. These were the men of the days that are gone. The awkwardness of those days bursts in the beginning, as a strange locomotive fills the the dark woods with light, and this synthesizes the overall mood for the picture: the direction, the cutting, the photography, the actors - and their meager lines -, are in a perfect unison.I remember "The Proposition" and the parallels that can be traced between (appart from Nick Cave): both movies use a similar visual technique, with long shots of the wilderness, small lines, subtle score and loose editing. The big difference is perhaps the voice over in "Jesse James...", a narrator that works almost like an historian and brings us closer to the characters and their inner feelings.Brad Pitt has good leading role – the best in the last years – looking a matured actor, and Casey Affleck has the first big opportunity to show what he's got – and he delivers.

The rebirth of a genre?

tt0443680

"The science fiction films are going in the same way of the westerns, there is nothing original, we have seen everything". I read this phrase of Ridley Scott (producer of this film) in an article about "The assassination of JJ by the coward RF" before i watch the film.I saw this film yesterday and i was thinking in that phrase because i really like this film so with "3:10 to Yuma" and soon with "No country for old men", Hollywood is trying to rebirth the most American genre in films and at least this film (i haven't seen the others)is a new type of western, not the classic one with heroes and shots everywhere.I mean this film contains all the elements of a classic western but it focus more into the character's minds and that's make it different so i think this the best western since Unforgiven and that is a film of 1992.I mean, there is the classics of the genre with the legendary John Wayne (The Searchers, Rio Bravo, etc.)making team with John Ford and with the great Howard Hawks. My personal favourite of this classics is Rio Bravo which is one of the best westerns ever, but latter there was just clichés in westerns until an Italian re-bird the most American genre: Segio Leone (one of my favourites directors ever) came with his "Spaghetti westerns" like The dollars trilogy with the great Clint Eastwood and of course the mystic "Once Upon A Time In The West". In this films there's my favourite western of all time: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. After that there were good films but it was until Eastwood's Unforgiven that the westerns were back again.So after a quick resume of the most popular westerns, i most say that the "The assassination....." is one of my favourite films of this year and i'm almost sure that the Academy is going to give some nominations to this film because Hollywood is trying to rebirth a genre that belong to America and to Sergio Leone.Finally,Brad Pitt make his best performance in the last years and the photography is amazing just like the way the story is told and well the plot is already in the title. Highly recommendable. 9.5 out of 10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-69

ur14207038

title: The rebirth of a genre? review: "The science fiction films are going in the same way of the westerns, there is nothing original, we have seen everything". I read this phrase of Ridley Scott (producer of this film) in an article about "The assassination of JJ by the coward RF" before i watch the film.I saw this film yesterday and i was thinking in that phrase because i really like this film so with "3:10 to Yuma" and soon with "No country for old men", Hollywood is trying to rebirth the most American genre in films and at least this film (i haven't seen the others)is a new type of western, not the classic one with heroes and shots everywhere.I mean this film contains all the elements of a classic western but it focus more into the character's minds and that's make it different so i think this the best western since Unforgiven and that is a film of 1992.I mean, there is the classics of the genre with the legendary John Wayne (The Searchers, Rio Bravo, etc.)making team with John Ford and with the great Howard Hawks. My personal favourite of this classics is Rio Bravo which is one of the best westerns ever, but latter there was just clichés in westerns until an Italian re-bird the most American genre: Segio Leone (one of my favourites directors ever) came with his "Spaghetti westerns" like The dollars trilogy with the great Clint Eastwood and of course the mystic "Once Upon A Time In The West". In this films there's my favourite western of all time: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. After that there were good films but it was until Eastwood's Unforgiven that the westerns were back again.So after a quick resume of the most popular westerns, i most say that the "The assassination....." is one of my favourite films of this year and i'm almost sure that the Academy is going to give some nominations to this film because Hollywood is trying to rebirth a genre that belong to America and to Sergio Leone.Finally,Brad Pitt make his best performance in the last years and the photography is amazing just like the way the story is told and well the plot is already in the title. Highly recommendable. 9.5 out of 10

A Reflection of Our Society

tt0443680

This was a very good movie and I would definitely recommend it but it is 2 hours and 40 minutes with it being slow at times. Still it has some great acting, musical score, cinematography with good directing.Casey Affleck has had a great year in acting with this movie and Gone Baby Gone. He gives such a deep, authentic and complex performance you could say he deserved an Oscar for it . He has what his brother Ben Affleck does not have, dedication to the character and the meanings and purpose they have within them. When I think about his performances and roles in both Gone Baby Gone and this really makes me wonder about myself and my character. Brad Pitt gave a very interesting performance as well but I still did not find it to be that great. At times he was a bit over the top but this is not to say that he was not good.What really transformed this movie was the cinematography and directing. The directing and cinematography really delivered on what the purpose of this movie is. It helped you understand the feelings, personalities but most of all the complexities of all the characters involved in the story. The cinematography and music fused together and really made me get a feel for the story and the movie.In a way this movie reflects our society today. The message of this movie was really deep and meaningful saying that everyone plays a role in society even if you don't like your role that is what you are. The public determines your destiny and image. It depicts gang life and how betrayal is the worst act that can be committed and in which loyalty is a must even if you know longer have relations with it. It shows how there always has to be a necessary evil or a scape goat no matter what effect it has on people because people do not want to blame themselves they want to blame others instead. This is movie happens to take place in the west rather than it being a western. This movie/story tries to tell us something that is deeply embedded in our minds and in our society. It displays what we think of ourselves is drastically different of the image of ourselves from other people.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-152

ur16117882

title: A Reflection of Our Society review: This was a very good movie and I would definitely recommend it but it is 2 hours and 40 minutes with it being slow at times. Still it has some great acting, musical score, cinematography with good directing.Casey Affleck has had a great year in acting with this movie and Gone Baby Gone. He gives such a deep, authentic and complex performance you could say he deserved an Oscar for it . He has what his brother Ben Affleck does not have, dedication to the character and the meanings and purpose they have within them. When I think about his performances and roles in both Gone Baby Gone and this really makes me wonder about myself and my character. Brad Pitt gave a very interesting performance as well but I still did not find it to be that great. At times he was a bit over the top but this is not to say that he was not good.What really transformed this movie was the cinematography and directing. The directing and cinematography really delivered on what the purpose of this movie is. It helped you understand the feelings, personalities but most of all the complexities of all the characters involved in the story. The cinematography and music fused together and really made me get a feel for the story and the movie.In a way this movie reflects our society today. The message of this movie was really deep and meaningful saying that everyone plays a role in society even if you don't like your role that is what you are. The public determines your destiny and image. It depicts gang life and how betrayal is the worst act that can be committed and in which loyalty is a must even if you know longer have relations with it. It shows how there always has to be a necessary evil or a scape goat no matter what effect it has on people because people do not want to blame themselves they want to blame others instead. This is movie happens to take place in the west rather than it being a western. This movie/story tries to tell us something that is deeply embedded in our minds and in our society. It displays what we think of ourselves is drastically different of the image of ourselves from other people.

epic stories need not be painfully long

tt0443680

I hope that director Dominik takes this advice. The 2 hours and 40 minutes length is the principal problem of this 'Jesse James' screen story. It is not difficult to imagine a shorter version of this film and you get a much better one.The very good news are Casey Affleck. Dare I say he is a better actor than his elder and more famous brother? Yes, I dare. I could not identify for a long time Ben Affleck in the crowd. Casey is both resembling physically to Ben, but also has a personality that strikes at first sight. His acting as Robert Ford, the young, fascinated and treacherous killer of outlaw Jesse James is deep and emotional. He matches the much more experienced Brad Pitt, who is giving himself an outstanding performance as the charismatic and suspicious Jesse James at the end of his criminal career and life.It is really a pity that the director having created the good acting and beautiful cinematography of the film seems to have become so much in love with his own creation that he did not want to leave out anything. What resulted is a full two hours which are becoming repetitive, a lot of characters that look and behave too much of the same just to come down under the bullets of a Jesse who understands he cannot trust anybody any longer. Surprisingly it is the last 20 minutes which avoid the film from becoming a more complete bore with the story of what happened to the killer after the assassination. The too long elegy until that point is balanced with a condensed and expressive epilogue. In most other films this post-ending would occupy just one scene of half minute. Here it saves the dayIt is interesting to see a non-American director in charge with such an American film and story. Dominik brings the fresh view that takes out of routine a genre as the Western. If only he could have resisted the temptation of making the film long as an American screen saga.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-296

ur0547823

title: epic stories need not be painfully long review: I hope that director Dominik takes this advice. The 2 hours and 40 minutes length is the principal problem of this 'Jesse James' screen story. It is not difficult to imagine a shorter version of this film and you get a much better one.The very good news are Casey Affleck. Dare I say he is a better actor than his elder and more famous brother? Yes, I dare. I could not identify for a long time Ben Affleck in the crowd. Casey is both resembling physically to Ben, but also has a personality that strikes at first sight. His acting as Robert Ford, the young, fascinated and treacherous killer of outlaw Jesse James is deep and emotional. He matches the much more experienced Brad Pitt, who is giving himself an outstanding performance as the charismatic and suspicious Jesse James at the end of his criminal career and life.It is really a pity that the director having created the good acting and beautiful cinematography of the film seems to have become so much in love with his own creation that he did not want to leave out anything. What resulted is a full two hours which are becoming repetitive, a lot of characters that look and behave too much of the same just to come down under the bullets of a Jesse who understands he cannot trust anybody any longer. Surprisingly it is the last 20 minutes which avoid the film from becoming a more complete bore with the story of what happened to the killer after the assassination. The too long elegy until that point is balanced with a condensed and expressive epilogue. In most other films this post-ending would occupy just one scene of half minute. Here it saves the dayIt is interesting to see a non-American director in charge with such an American film and story. Dominik brings the fresh view that takes out of routine a genre as the Western. If only he could have resisted the temptation of making the film long as an American screen saga.

Brad Pitt stars as legendary Wild West outlaw Jesse James.

tt0443680

The nervy style of this newfangled Western, with its eerie, insinuating score by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis, is so effective that long after Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck have left the screen, emotional disturbance lingers like gun smoke. The film is an account of the final years of the outlaw Jesse James, how he came to be slain by a member of his own gang, and the curious aftermath of his death.The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford is ravishing looking, in muted tones that recall sepia-tinted photos, the story has a modern resonance; Affleck's grinning, sycophantic Ford is like a celebrity stalker-fan who goes to the extremes. Pitt's Jesse verges on psychosis, switching from charm to cold fury in an instant. This slow moving film, all showy vistas, field of waving corn and fast-moving clouds, aims for epic grandeur. But director Andrew Dominik also stages a night-time train robbery thrillingly. An elegy for the Old West, it is touched with brilliance throughout.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-333

ur22131361

title: Brad Pitt stars as legendary Wild West outlaw Jesse James. review: The nervy style of this newfangled Western, with its eerie, insinuating score by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis, is so effective that long after Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck have left the screen, emotional disturbance lingers like gun smoke. The film is an account of the final years of the outlaw Jesse James, how he came to be slain by a member of his own gang, and the curious aftermath of his death.The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford is ravishing looking, in muted tones that recall sepia-tinted photos, the story has a modern resonance; Affleck's grinning, sycophantic Ford is like a celebrity stalker-fan who goes to the extremes. Pitt's Jesse verges on psychosis, switching from charm to cold fury in an instant. This slow moving film, all showy vistas, field of waving corn and fast-moving clouds, aims for epic grandeur. But director Andrew Dominik also stages a night-time train robbery thrillingly. An elegy for the Old West, it is touched with brilliance throughout.

A tiresome experience

tt0443680

If Jesse James was really so void of personality and depth as Brad Pitt portrays him to be, then there should never have been a movie about him. There are attempts to give the guy some soul, but it doesn't work. I don't know why, maybe Pitt simply can't help being himself, and brings to the screen a very confused man who tries to be cool, cocky and depressed at the same time, but you feel it doesn't make for natural viewing at all. Even the way he speaks is very unnatural. He finds it very hard to play anything but himself.The only redeeming feature, and the only engaging character in this film is Robert Ford, played by a magnificent Casey Affleck. He's the only guy one can connect with, even though he's a misguided, delusional youth.That's where the compliments end. Because the film sets out as a deep character study of people without character, and cares not a iota about thrilling or entertaining with plots, it turns out to be one loooong failure.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-321

ur17012037

title: A tiresome experience review: If Jesse James was really so void of personality and depth as Brad Pitt portrays him to be, then there should never have been a movie about him. There are attempts to give the guy some soul, but it doesn't work. I don't know why, maybe Pitt simply can't help being himself, and brings to the screen a very confused man who tries to be cool, cocky and depressed at the same time, but you feel it doesn't make for natural viewing at all. Even the way he speaks is very unnatural. He finds it very hard to play anything but himself.The only redeeming feature, and the only engaging character in this film is Robert Ford, played by a magnificent Casey Affleck. He's the only guy one can connect with, even though he's a misguided, delusional youth.That's where the compliments end. Because the film sets out as a deep character study of people without character, and cares not a iota about thrilling or entertaining with plots, it turns out to be one loooong failure.

A meditative take on one of the legends of the Old West

tt0443680

Andrew Dominik's film "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" meditates on the hero cult, and the complicity between the obsessive and its object of obsession. Yes, the right word to describe this odd Western is *meditative*, for it ruminates on its subject, in slow takes that settles on minute gestures, in lyrical narration that seems to pause than to advance the narrative, in dirge-like music with the rhythm of slowly melting snow, and the impeccable photography of landscapes of desaturated palettes like an Andrew Wyeth canvas.Critics were split over this movie. Some found its pace (at 152 min) too much of an ordeal, faulting the writer/director for the waste of time on this meandering and self-indulgent 'doily' of a Western (The Hollywood Reporter, Salon). What else can be added to the story of Jesse James and Robert Ford that hasn't been told, that would merit such long-winded treatment? The answer: the protracted anguish of both characters, deftly portrayed by Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck. Pitt is back in form since "A River Runs Through It", infusing the screen with both menace and sympathy with his Jesse James. In contrast Affleck's Ford squeaks in a feeble voice, gazes like a pained animal, and is both pitiful and creepy. Contrary to complaints, both characters are obsessively watchable, and the movie does hook you in its lilting rhythm; the small details do build up and accrue, and resolve into a final clarity. And here, I agree with Variety: "But any sense of viewer impatience is soon overtaken by the film's accumulation of detail on every front--narrative, historical, folkloric, behavioral and psychological. Pitching the dialogue in a way that neatly injects prairie twang with a literary lyricism, Dominik settles into an expansive narrative strategy of the sort often found in novels and longform series, wherein the story skips and meanders among events whose relevance and meaning may be initially unclear, but which are all there for good reasons." (Variety, 31 Aug 2007) You need the stamina from reading 19th century novels, or watching a Kurosawa take with the camera planted on the tripod whilst actors play out the scene, to earn the rewards of this film. And it is finally rewarding.(A long version of this review appears in: stickslip.wordpress.com as "That Dirty Little Coward That Shot Mr. Howard")

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-285

ur19949795

title: A meditative take on one of the legends of the Old West review: Andrew Dominik's film "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" meditates on the hero cult, and the complicity between the obsessive and its object of obsession. Yes, the right word to describe this odd Western is *meditative*, for it ruminates on its subject, in slow takes that settles on minute gestures, in lyrical narration that seems to pause than to advance the narrative, in dirge-like music with the rhythm of slowly melting snow, and the impeccable photography of landscapes of desaturated palettes like an Andrew Wyeth canvas.Critics were split over this movie. Some found its pace (at 152 min) too much of an ordeal, faulting the writer/director for the waste of time on this meandering and self-indulgent 'doily' of a Western (The Hollywood Reporter, Salon). What else can be added to the story of Jesse James and Robert Ford that hasn't been told, that would merit such long-winded treatment? The answer: the protracted anguish of both characters, deftly portrayed by Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck. Pitt is back in form since "A River Runs Through It", infusing the screen with both menace and sympathy with his Jesse James. In contrast Affleck's Ford squeaks in a feeble voice, gazes like a pained animal, and is both pitiful and creepy. Contrary to complaints, both characters are obsessively watchable, and the movie does hook you in its lilting rhythm; the small details do build up and accrue, and resolve into a final clarity. And here, I agree with Variety: "But any sense of viewer impatience is soon overtaken by the film's accumulation of detail on every front--narrative, historical, folkloric, behavioral and psychological. Pitching the dialogue in a way that neatly injects prairie twang with a literary lyricism, Dominik settles into an expansive narrative strategy of the sort often found in novels and longform series, wherein the story skips and meanders among events whose relevance and meaning may be initially unclear, but which are all there for good reasons." (Variety, 31 Aug 2007) You need the stamina from reading 19th century novels, or watching a Kurosawa take with the camera planted on the tripod whilst actors play out the scene, to earn the rewards of this film. And it is finally rewarding.(A long version of this review appears in: stickslip.wordpress.com as "That Dirty Little Coward That Shot Mr. Howard")

Too Long of a Title, Suffice to say: He Died

tt0443680

Wow, what a spoiler the title of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford was. I'm not into westerns, but strangely, when I do watch one, I generally like them. This one I did…albeit it was rather slow, VERY long and already gave away the ending in the title. Yeah, I'm assuming they assumed everyone and their great-great-great-grandparents knew the story, but it's untrue – the fact we all knew what happened. I didn't. In either case, it was entertaining, but not something I ever want to sit through again. Most notable was the performance of Casey Affleck even though Brad was still good, and the score and cinematography. Not my favorite western, not even in the top 5…this, coming from someone who's seen maybe a dozen westerns in my life, so it's somewhere in the bottom 10 (of 12)…but it's still worth a (as in one) viewing.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-407

ur17825945

title: Too Long of a Title, Suffice to say: He Died review: Wow, what a spoiler the title of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford was. I'm not into westerns, but strangely, when I do watch one, I generally like them. This one I did…albeit it was rather slow, VERY long and already gave away the ending in the title. Yeah, I'm assuming they assumed everyone and their great-great-great-grandparents knew the story, but it's untrue – the fact we all knew what happened. I didn't. In either case, it was entertaining, but not something I ever want to sit through again. Most notable was the performance of Casey Affleck even though Brad was still good, and the score and cinematography. Not my favorite western, not even in the top 5…this, coming from someone who's seen maybe a dozen westerns in my life, so it's somewhere in the bottom 10 (of 12)…but it's still worth a (as in one) viewing.

Too long and way too slow

tt0443680

This is one of those movies that so many people on this web site absolutely love.I have read many of the reviews posted about this movie and find myself in disagreement with most of them.It isn't all bad but I will try and explain just why I can only give this film a five out of ten score.Firstly,I will admit that the cinematography here is fabulous.A really great job was done on the look of this movie.Also,the acting is pretty good throughout although I think that the praise that Casey Affleck(Robert Ford) has garnered has been overplayed.He is good but not brilliant.In his early appearances in the movie he tries too hard to be the naive and slightly odd youngster and his voice is grating.You can just tell he is acting.He is much better later on as he becomes a more cynical character.But it must be said that there are other actors here that are just as impressive especially Garret Dillahunt(Ed Miller) and Sam Rockwell(Charley Ford).Also impressive is Sam Shephard(Frank James),who is very much underused.Brad Pitt is fine as Jesse James.Not an award winning performance but he is OK.Now I come to the two biggest problems.The film is way too long and also way too slow.There are just too many times when the pace drags almost to a stop and there doesn't appear to be anything going on at all.I have no problem at all with films almost three hours in length if they hold the attention.'Godfather 1 & 2','The Good,The Bad & The Ugly' and 'Once Upon A Time In The West' are all wonderful movies simply because the stories are so compelling.They are involving and the pace moves towards a gripping conclusion.With 'The Assassination Of Jesse James' the pace flags too often and by half way I was losing patience and interest.I have read reviews where people have compared this to the films of Sergio Leone.Don't make me laugh!It comes nowhere near to the tension,the sheer drama his westerns can muster.Many people will think my review is a load of rubbish but I stick by it as this is a ponderous movie.Great to look at maybe but a journey that will most definitely make you saddle sore.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-270

ur9917850

title: Too long and way too slow review: This is one of those movies that so many people on this web site absolutely love.I have read many of the reviews posted about this movie and find myself in disagreement with most of them.It isn't all bad but I will try and explain just why I can only give this film a five out of ten score.Firstly,I will admit that the cinematography here is fabulous.A really great job was done on the look of this movie.Also,the acting is pretty good throughout although I think that the praise that Casey Affleck(Robert Ford) has garnered has been overplayed.He is good but not brilliant.In his early appearances in the movie he tries too hard to be the naive and slightly odd youngster and his voice is grating.You can just tell he is acting.He is much better later on as he becomes a more cynical character.But it must be said that there are other actors here that are just as impressive especially Garret Dillahunt(Ed Miller) and Sam Rockwell(Charley Ford).Also impressive is Sam Shephard(Frank James),who is very much underused.Brad Pitt is fine as Jesse James.Not an award winning performance but he is OK.Now I come to the two biggest problems.The film is way too long and also way too slow.There are just too many times when the pace drags almost to a stop and there doesn't appear to be anything going on at all.I have no problem at all with films almost three hours in length if they hold the attention.'Godfather 1 & 2','The Good,The Bad & The Ugly' and 'Once Upon A Time In The West' are all wonderful movies simply because the stories are so compelling.They are involving and the pace moves towards a gripping conclusion.With 'The Assassination Of Jesse James' the pace flags too often and by half way I was losing patience and interest.I have read reviews where people have compared this to the films of Sergio Leone.Don't make me laugh!It comes nowhere near to the tension,the sheer drama his westerns can muster.Many people will think my review is a load of rubbish but I stick by it as this is a ponderous movie.Great to look at maybe but a journey that will most definitely make you saddle sore.

Fame Monsters

tt0443680

There are perhaps few films in which the basic synopsis of the script can be summed up in the title. One thinks of lesser fare than this, certainly ("Zack And Miri Make A Porno", for example) or rather interesting Spanish translations of titles (classic "Family Guy" joke here, top prize for whoever gets the reference first). With this film, the title does just that - it is about the assassination of the notorious Western criminal by one of his associates, Robert Ford, who ends up being defamed in the history books as a coward, and the time line leading up to the aforementioned event. Simple.But not quite, for, as with most great films, there is always something more, another message that the film is trying to say. And this is a great film. A really great film.Visually, it's stunning. The bleak Western landscape perfectly captures the mood of the story, with slight out of focus shots beautifully helping to add to the unhinged portrayal of the anti-hero James by Brad Pitt. This is one of those films where you suddenly remember that Pitt, the second half of 'Brangelina', can act occasionally. It's a fantastic performance, showing James as an out of control beast, but also with some very quiet melancholic foreboding, as if he knows he's living on borrowed time. It's matched, and perhaps even bettered, by a superb performance by Casey Affleck as Ford; Affleck is a dreamer, a man refusing to grow up, whose fantasies of riding with the James gang and being the criminal's best buddy seem to have corrupted his naive innocence. When the cold-blooded reality sinks in of the true nature of Jesse's work and Jesse's character, it becomes unbearable.There are other terrific performances in the film, not least from Sam Rockwell as Ford's older brother, whose own gullibility is soon swallowed up by fear, and a short but mesmerising turn from Garret Dillahunt as Ed Miller, whose paranoia costs him his life and lights the fuse for James' own fragile sense of trust to be shattered.The script is well paced, exploring the story like a history documentary with Hugh Ross' calm narration. There's no point in hiding the ending - the title's given it away already. Instead, the script is full of explanations, showing why Ford did what he did, and leaving it up to us to determine whether or not it was a good thing and whether or not he really was a 'coward', as suggested in the ballad sung by one of the film's co-composers, Nick Cave. He and Warren Ellis do a fine job with the score, leaving it subtle and calm, and adding to the quiet life out in the wilderness.Overall, the film is about fame and the hunger for fame. James is famous for his notoriety, a man who, like the characters played by Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis in "Natural Born Killers", becomes famous for all the wrong reasons. Ford wants the same kind of fame, but when he gets it in the aftermath of his role in James' death, he finds it stifling and unsatisfying, and over far too quickly; the fame of a coward does not last as long as the fame of a 'hero'. And so the film speaks volumes for us today, in this age where we've lived through the last decade as the Decade of 15 Minutes, the decade where anyone and everyone can be famous for as long as Ford was, and can still find it as he does.A fantastic film.8/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-322

ur4405625

title: Fame Monsters review: There are perhaps few films in which the basic synopsis of the script can be summed up in the title. One thinks of lesser fare than this, certainly ("Zack And Miri Make A Porno", for example) or rather interesting Spanish translations of titles (classic "Family Guy" joke here, top prize for whoever gets the reference first). With this film, the title does just that - it is about the assassination of the notorious Western criminal by one of his associates, Robert Ford, who ends up being defamed in the history books as a coward, and the time line leading up to the aforementioned event. Simple.But not quite, for, as with most great films, there is always something more, another message that the film is trying to say. And this is a great film. A really great film.Visually, it's stunning. The bleak Western landscape perfectly captures the mood of the story, with slight out of focus shots beautifully helping to add to the unhinged portrayal of the anti-hero James by Brad Pitt. This is one of those films where you suddenly remember that Pitt, the second half of 'Brangelina', can act occasionally. It's a fantastic performance, showing James as an out of control beast, but also with some very quiet melancholic foreboding, as if he knows he's living on borrowed time. It's matched, and perhaps even bettered, by a superb performance by Casey Affleck as Ford; Affleck is a dreamer, a man refusing to grow up, whose fantasies of riding with the James gang and being the criminal's best buddy seem to have corrupted his naive innocence. When the cold-blooded reality sinks in of the true nature of Jesse's work and Jesse's character, it becomes unbearable.There are other terrific performances in the film, not least from Sam Rockwell as Ford's older brother, whose own gullibility is soon swallowed up by fear, and a short but mesmerising turn from Garret Dillahunt as Ed Miller, whose paranoia costs him his life and lights the fuse for James' own fragile sense of trust to be shattered.The script is well paced, exploring the story like a history documentary with Hugh Ross' calm narration. There's no point in hiding the ending - the title's given it away already. Instead, the script is full of explanations, showing why Ford did what he did, and leaving it up to us to determine whether or not it was a good thing and whether or not he really was a 'coward', as suggested in the ballad sung by one of the film's co-composers, Nick Cave. He and Warren Ellis do a fine job with the score, leaving it subtle and calm, and adding to the quiet life out in the wilderness.Overall, the film is about fame and the hunger for fame. James is famous for his notoriety, a man who, like the characters played by Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis in "Natural Born Killers", becomes famous for all the wrong reasons. Ford wants the same kind of fame, but when he gets it in the aftermath of his role in James' death, he finds it stifling and unsatisfying, and over far too quickly; the fame of a coward does not last as long as the fame of a 'hero'. And so the film speaks volumes for us today, in this age where we've lived through the last decade as the Decade of 15 Minutes, the decade where anyone and everyone can be famous for as long as Ford was, and can still find it as he does.A fantastic film.8/10

An epic, sprawling splendor of cinema

tt0443680

The Assassination of Jesse James is an epic, sprawling splendor of cinema, right from its title and through its near-three-hour running time. Dominik and everyone else involved have taken a huge chance with this, as it is a creation that could so easily go wrong, lose its focus, wander off and leave the audience apathetic and bored. Luckily for Dominik, he has the best the cinematic craft has to offer in order to help him along. Starting from perhaps some of the best use of voice-over narration since American Beauty, Dominik manages to capture us and draw us into the whirlwind that is the life and times of Jesse James. Like in Terrence Malick's films, the plot takes backseat to atmosphere, character, and beauty. The film is not about the last robbery of the James brothers, nor is it about the course of their lives after the train robbery that opens the film. Thinking back, I'm finding it increasingly difficult to even recollect any major plot points in the film; certainly not enough to fill its entirety. What interests Dominik are his characters, namely those of Jesse James and Robert Ford but also many others surrounding them, and their ever-changing relationship and dynamics leading up to James' inevitable, title-featured assassination. The film portrays an atmosphere, feelings, musings and character far more than it presents a tangible, developing plot.Extraordinarily for a sophomore film project, especially that of a foreign director, Dominik surrounds himself with the finest cinematic craftsmen Hollywood has to offer. In true Malickian form, Dominik allows these technical, visual aspects to occasionally take center stage and further accentuate the feelings, character emotions, and the atmosphere he is trying to evoke. What particularly stands out is the absolutely stunning cinematography by now-legend Roger Deakins, easily one of the greatest cinematographers working in Hollywood today and second only to Emmanuel Lubezki and Janusz Kaminski in my opinion. Like Malick's two Western masterpieces, Badlands and Days of Heaven, but also featured prominently in his two more recent subsequent features, Dominik embellishes his film with extended shots of the beautiful, wide-open vistas of the rolling fields and wide-open spaces of the 19th century American frontier.Dominik did not only luck out on his technical team, but also with his wonderfully talented acting troupe. His two leading men, one a long-time Hollywood A-lister and the other surely a shoo-in for the same list in the very near future, deliver exquisite, powerful work that is a peak for both of their careers. Brad Pitt, the veteran, observed in a recent interview that he seems to be getting better with each subsequent film role and finds his older work incomparable to his more recent efforts. I have to admit, the man has a point. Although stellar in Twelve Monkeys and Fight Club, Pitt also excelled at delivering bland, single-note performances in films such as Seven Years in Tibet or Meet Joe Black. Recently he has been truly out-doing himself and if his subdued, grayed turn in last year's Babel was the best performance he had delivered up until that point, he manages to even exceed that with his incredible, powerful, dominant role as Jesse James. Pitt nails every little quirk in James; his mannerisms, his ticks, his glances and smirks. His performance is so powerful it dominates the entire film even during extended sequences without his character. But the true stunner is Casey Affleck, who has appeared in smaller background roles in his brother's previous movies but has had two chances this year to truly shine. If Gone Baby Gone seals his abilities as a strong leading man, The Assassination of Jesse James, while not a lead role, certainly seals his undeniable talent as an actor. It is one of those performances that is so exhilarating and entrancing to watch, one can't wait for the character to return to the screen and relishes every moment with him. Another powerful characterization, Affleck absolutely nails the kind of naïve, wide-eyed wonder of Robert Ford, and his interactions with Jesse James; his sheepish grins, his feeble attempts to impress, his embarrassment. It is an incredible, powerful performance that were it not for Javier Bardem would surely be a lead contender for the best supporting performance of the year. Also worth a mention is the criminally underrated Sam Rockwell, who in movie after movie is able to deliver wonderful, fascinating turns. How his leading turn in Confessions of a Dangerous Mind didn't transform him into one of the most reliable leading men on the scene is way beyond me, and I look forward to all of his work. He manages to inject just enough of himself in all of his roles while still remaining loyal to the source material. I hope his big break is on the way.This year saw a revival and an abundant resurgence in two old-Hollywood film genres; the musical and the Western. Between this, 3:10 to Yuma, and the less traditional There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men, one could very easily attribute this year as the year of the Western renaissance. It's no coincidence that these four titles are also among the best of the year. I have not seen his previous effort, Chopper, but The Assassination of Jesse James is enough for me to certify Andrew Dominik as a directorial force to be reckoned with. The film truly stands out in a year abundant in excellent sophomore films (for example, Juno and Atonement, just to name a couple), and although not quite the masterpiece it wants to be, it certainly comes as close to it as possible.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-144

ur3112639

title: An epic, sprawling splendor of cinema review: The Assassination of Jesse James is an epic, sprawling splendor of cinema, right from its title and through its near-three-hour running time. Dominik and everyone else involved have taken a huge chance with this, as it is a creation that could so easily go wrong, lose its focus, wander off and leave the audience apathetic and bored. Luckily for Dominik, he has the best the cinematic craft has to offer in order to help him along. Starting from perhaps some of the best use of voice-over narration since American Beauty, Dominik manages to capture us and draw us into the whirlwind that is the life and times of Jesse James. Like in Terrence Malick's films, the plot takes backseat to atmosphere, character, and beauty. The film is not about the last robbery of the James brothers, nor is it about the course of their lives after the train robbery that opens the film. Thinking back, I'm finding it increasingly difficult to even recollect any major plot points in the film; certainly not enough to fill its entirety. What interests Dominik are his characters, namely those of Jesse James and Robert Ford but also many others surrounding them, and their ever-changing relationship and dynamics leading up to James' inevitable, title-featured assassination. The film portrays an atmosphere, feelings, musings and character far more than it presents a tangible, developing plot.Extraordinarily for a sophomore film project, especially that of a foreign director, Dominik surrounds himself with the finest cinematic craftsmen Hollywood has to offer. In true Malickian form, Dominik allows these technical, visual aspects to occasionally take center stage and further accentuate the feelings, character emotions, and the atmosphere he is trying to evoke. What particularly stands out is the absolutely stunning cinematography by now-legend Roger Deakins, easily one of the greatest cinematographers working in Hollywood today and second only to Emmanuel Lubezki and Janusz Kaminski in my opinion. Like Malick's two Western masterpieces, Badlands and Days of Heaven, but also featured prominently in his two more recent subsequent features, Dominik embellishes his film with extended shots of the beautiful, wide-open vistas of the rolling fields and wide-open spaces of the 19th century American frontier.Dominik did not only luck out on his technical team, but also with his wonderfully talented acting troupe. His two leading men, one a long-time Hollywood A-lister and the other surely a shoo-in for the same list in the very near future, deliver exquisite, powerful work that is a peak for both of their careers. Brad Pitt, the veteran, observed in a recent interview that he seems to be getting better with each subsequent film role and finds his older work incomparable to his more recent efforts. I have to admit, the man has a point. Although stellar in Twelve Monkeys and Fight Club, Pitt also excelled at delivering bland, single-note performances in films such as Seven Years in Tibet or Meet Joe Black. Recently he has been truly out-doing himself and if his subdued, grayed turn in last year's Babel was the best performance he had delivered up until that point, he manages to even exceed that with his incredible, powerful, dominant role as Jesse James. Pitt nails every little quirk in James; his mannerisms, his ticks, his glances and smirks. His performance is so powerful it dominates the entire film even during extended sequences without his character. But the true stunner is Casey Affleck, who has appeared in smaller background roles in his brother's previous movies but has had two chances this year to truly shine. If Gone Baby Gone seals his abilities as a strong leading man, The Assassination of Jesse James, while not a lead role, certainly seals his undeniable talent as an actor. It is one of those performances that is so exhilarating and entrancing to watch, one can't wait for the character to return to the screen and relishes every moment with him. Another powerful characterization, Affleck absolutely nails the kind of naïve, wide-eyed wonder of Robert Ford, and his interactions with Jesse James; his sheepish grins, his feeble attempts to impress, his embarrassment. It is an incredible, powerful performance that were it not for Javier Bardem would surely be a lead contender for the best supporting performance of the year. Also worth a mention is the criminally underrated Sam Rockwell, who in movie after movie is able to deliver wonderful, fascinating turns. How his leading turn in Confessions of a Dangerous Mind didn't transform him into one of the most reliable leading men on the scene is way beyond me, and I look forward to all of his work. He manages to inject just enough of himself in all of his roles while still remaining loyal to the source material. I hope his big break is on the way.This year saw a revival and an abundant resurgence in two old-Hollywood film genres; the musical and the Western. Between this, 3:10 to Yuma, and the less traditional There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men, one could very easily attribute this year as the year of the Western renaissance. It's no coincidence that these four titles are also among the best of the year. I have not seen his previous effort, Chopper, but The Assassination of Jesse James is enough for me to certify Andrew Dominik as a directorial force to be reckoned with. The film truly stands out in a year abundant in excellent sophomore films (for example, Juno and Atonement, just to name a couple), and although not quite the masterpiece it wants to be, it certainly comes as close to it as possible.

Excellent movie-one of the best of the decade

tt0443680

Can Hugh Ross be my Best Supporting Actor of 2007 for his narration of The Assassinatino of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford? I loved his narration. So perfectly spoken and rich. Best movie I saw from 2007. Better than There Will Be Blood and No Country For Old Men. The acting, cinematography, direction. It's intoxicating leaves you speechless and amazed. Casey Affleck is excellent and so is Brad Pitt. The entire cast is strong. The ending when Robert Ford is doing the show about how he killed James is really haunting. His pleasure in reliving the killing and how it brought him fame is where Affleck really excels. The makeup when he is on stage is also really good. A+.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-256

ur0754399

title: Excellent movie-one of the best of the decade review: Can Hugh Ross be my Best Supporting Actor of 2007 for his narration of The Assassinatino of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford? I loved his narration. So perfectly spoken and rich. Best movie I saw from 2007. Better than There Will Be Blood and No Country For Old Men. The acting, cinematography, direction. It's intoxicating leaves you speechless and amazed. Casey Affleck is excellent and so is Brad Pitt. The entire cast is strong. The ending when Robert Ford is doing the show about how he killed James is really haunting. His pleasure in reliving the killing and how it brought him fame is where Affleck really excels. The makeup when he is on stage is also really good. A+.

Pitt assassinates the Oscar competition

tt0443680

From writer/director Andrew Dominik comes the long titled and lengthy timed The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford starring Academy Award nominee Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck. The film in so much of its glory has both positive and negative components that make this an uneasy experience at the movies.Director Dominik has great control of the picture but when the film went into the editing room the film underwent some problems. The film never keeps the momentum to be an amazing picture. The viewer is connected for the first 15 minutes, then bored for 10, then enchanted for 45, bored for 15, then comes the anticipated climax and you think its over, then it goes on for another half hour. Dominik gives the audience the best understanding of Jesse James possible so we can become better acquainted with him but brings in an slew of different characters that, to be perfectly honest, I don't care that much about. I believe this might be a example of over character development where we get all the aspects of his life but all we want is Jesse.Last year, many critics were stating Brad Pitt gave his best performance ever in Babel however, his Jesse James is the best performance of his career by a mile. Pitt wears Jesse like an overgrown coat that you don't want to get rid of. Pitt gives the most tortured, endearing, and frightening performance of the year thus far. He makes the audience so uncomfortable and awkward yet gives off sensitivity and compassion for a very unlikable and ferocious man. If buzz builds, expect Pitt to be a huge contender at the Oscars.Casey Affleck, arguably the better actor of the Affleck clan gives the most pathetic, annoying and cowardly performance in the last ten years; and its brilliant. With his deep "admiration" for Jesse, his Robert Ford is engulfed in Jesse's presence and wants enjoy the moments with him, even if he is in fear of him. The finale is truly his show as he stretches out his acting legs and dissolves into a character you can't wait to see off-screen.The cast ensemble is a true revelation as each character as over-developed as they might be, all bring a sense of humanity, charisma, and heartbreak to their roles. Sam Rockwell who is on the verge of being a household name and coming his way to a nomination one day plays Charley Ford, brother of Robert, as magnetic as the character demands. Mary Louise Parker, who is one of the better actress' working today, goes nowhere as Jesse's wife. This is a role that is very Academy friendly, and throws it away in a her limited screen time Sam Shepard who plays the older brother of Jesse, shows fear and anguish built up in a man who yearns for emotional freedom from crime. Paul Schneider, Jeremy Renner and Garret Dillahunt all turn in exceptional performances and enhance a cast of big name stars. Expect a possible Screen Actors Cast Ensemble nod for these men.Expect a possible and much deserved cinematography nomination for the overdue Roger Deakins, which is the strongest technical aspect of the picture. Also a great score by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis is a possibility along with great costumes by Patricia Norris and perfect art direction by Janice Blackey-Goodine. The appeal is there for the film as a whole but it leaves us floating a little too often in a long river of bravery, artistry and commendation. Dominik will likely be cited for some breakthrough director awards with the picture popping up during precursors' season.Get ready for the assassination everyone knows is coming but no one can prepare for. Never has been a film that tells you the entire story in the title and can still surprise the viewer with beautiful cinematic moments.Grade: ***/****

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-2

ur2898980

title: Pitt assassinates the Oscar competition review: From writer/director Andrew Dominik comes the long titled and lengthy timed The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford starring Academy Award nominee Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck. The film in so much of its glory has both positive and negative components that make this an uneasy experience at the movies.Director Dominik has great control of the picture but when the film went into the editing room the film underwent some problems. The film never keeps the momentum to be an amazing picture. The viewer is connected for the first 15 minutes, then bored for 10, then enchanted for 45, bored for 15, then comes the anticipated climax and you think its over, then it goes on for another half hour. Dominik gives the audience the best understanding of Jesse James possible so we can become better acquainted with him but brings in an slew of different characters that, to be perfectly honest, I don't care that much about. I believe this might be a example of over character development where we get all the aspects of his life but all we want is Jesse.Last year, many critics were stating Brad Pitt gave his best performance ever in Babel however, his Jesse James is the best performance of his career by a mile. Pitt wears Jesse like an overgrown coat that you don't want to get rid of. Pitt gives the most tortured, endearing, and frightening performance of the year thus far. He makes the audience so uncomfortable and awkward yet gives off sensitivity and compassion for a very unlikable and ferocious man. If buzz builds, expect Pitt to be a huge contender at the Oscars.Casey Affleck, arguably the better actor of the Affleck clan gives the most pathetic, annoying and cowardly performance in the last ten years; and its brilliant. With his deep "admiration" for Jesse, his Robert Ford is engulfed in Jesse's presence and wants enjoy the moments with him, even if he is in fear of him. The finale is truly his show as he stretches out his acting legs and dissolves into a character you can't wait to see off-screen.The cast ensemble is a true revelation as each character as over-developed as they might be, all bring a sense of humanity, charisma, and heartbreak to their roles. Sam Rockwell who is on the verge of being a household name and coming his way to a nomination one day plays Charley Ford, brother of Robert, as magnetic as the character demands. Mary Louise Parker, who is one of the better actress' working today, goes nowhere as Jesse's wife. This is a role that is very Academy friendly, and throws it away in a her limited screen time Sam Shepard who plays the older brother of Jesse, shows fear and anguish built up in a man who yearns for emotional freedom from crime. Paul Schneider, Jeremy Renner and Garret Dillahunt all turn in exceptional performances and enhance a cast of big name stars. Expect a possible Screen Actors Cast Ensemble nod for these men.Expect a possible and much deserved cinematography nomination for the overdue Roger Deakins, which is the strongest technical aspect of the picture. Also a great score by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis is a possibility along with great costumes by Patricia Norris and perfect art direction by Janice Blackey-Goodine. The appeal is there for the film as a whole but it leaves us floating a little too often in a long river of bravery, artistry and commendation. Dominik will likely be cited for some breakthrough director awards with the picture popping up during precursors' season.Get ready for the assassination everyone knows is coming but no one can prepare for. Never has been a film that tells you the entire story in the title and can still surprise the viewer with beautiful cinematic moments.Grade: ***/****

Melancholic beauty

tt0443680

Hollywood has the idea to glamorize and exaggerate virtually every historical figure without acknowledging that the respective person's true self. This creates a flawed notion of the time period, yet there are times where a biopic is created with truthful richness and this so happens to be one of those times.As the title explains, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is pretty much that and, of course, the events that led up to the act. Jesse (Brad Pitt) decides that he will attempt one last robbery and call his career quits after that. Yet after the feat paranoia crawls into Jesse as he begins to debate whether members of his last outing might in fact take the large bounty that plagues him. Over time he becomes interested in Robert Ford (Casey Affleck), a nineteen year old who has idolized Jesse since his childhood but discovers that the outlaw hero is not what he appears.From the very opening scene the film captures you in its Western setting, and the authenticity of the period of the outlaw Jesse James is virtually realistic, albeit a few historical inaccuracies. Though if you aren't well versed in the history of Jesse James you won't have much to worry about, as these inaccuracies are relatively minor and doesn't impact on the overall feel of the characters, and story. The film is slow and almost action-less. For the most part this suitably helps the films haunting veneer. But beyond the realism and atmosphere, the film has an excellent way of never defining a definite hero or villain. Yes, it is obvious how certain characters are to be finally viewed, but Jesse is not the heroic outlaw he is perceived to be. He is mocking and willingly to kill needlessly. As well, Ford is not just the coward he is made out to be. He's a fragile character who has good intentions but his youthfulness does not allow him to see further then his actions.Once again Brad Pitt proves a wonder to watch, with his portrayal of Jesse James being one of his best. You can feel the cold, calculated nuances of Pitt's acting and the love and compassion his character is capable of. His acting his realistic and he is supported wonderfully by the rest of the cast, especially Casey Affleck, who on par with Pitt. Affleck has never struck me as being that great an actor, but his performance was nothing less than amazing. He exudes a creepy nervousness that is just waiting to burst into something more.There is, as well, an accompanying narrator. Who this person is remains a mystery, but who he is, is never ever the point. The narrator (Hugh Ross) like all narrators, serves as the story's guide, pointing out information of extreme importance, In fact, while the film is long, it could have been longer were it not for the narrator. He brings about certain bits of information throughout the film which adds depth to various characters, without these particulars having to be shown. One such time explains how Frank James (Sam Shepard) felt after the death of his brother Jesse, but we never see the character post-Jesse's death. It appears like a quick scheme to get more story development without showing more, but its execution is practically flawless. The music department is pretty thin: the majority of the film plays without music whatsoever, and when music is used, it's done so as a transition point from one main story arc to the nest. Best yet, it doesn't feel out of place and only goes to enhance the somber atmosphere of the film itself.If there is anything stopping this film from reaching greatness, it would be pacing issues. The film is just a little too long for its own good. While its final length cannot be cut by much, as every scene portrayed is of utmost importance, some scenes do linger on a few seconds too long. Much of the additional runtime comes from the director's attempt at adding abstract, yet serene, images of the environment, and just being too art-like. This is partly in due to the great number of times the director, Andrew Dominik, tries these shots, and also because every time this is performed, the main focus is always in the middle. While this is particularly the function of having an images centerpiece in the middle for emphasis, it just happens far too often and the art-like nature of the film loses its appeal. Still the director does indeed have some real highpoints, especially the beginning of the day of Jesse James death, where we are greeted with a splash of nervousness in regards to Ford. Even towards the end of the film the director experiments and with great results, adding much depth with symbolism. The scenes that are up to this quality show the ability the director has, but its shame he falls into a mediocre pattern.No sex and no nudity although there is a scene involving one man walking on a woman who is using the bathroom. Language use is kept to a minimum and violence, while infrequent, is violent and realistic.The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, sadly, misses its mark by a few inches. The story is engaging, if a little inaccurate and a little too much to digest in regards to the films length; the acting is of a sublime quality; the music is well placed and fits the films overall mood nicely, and the cinematography is absolutely breathtaking in its simplicity, but becomes overused. If you can survive till the films conclusion, and honestly if you cannot then it is a real shame, you will have watched one of the best films to grace 2007. The name of Jesse James still lives on, but now in a far more grand state.-- Full version available at http://cruizd.blogspot.com –

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-92

ur5152832

title: Melancholic beauty review: Hollywood has the idea to glamorize and exaggerate virtually every historical figure without acknowledging that the respective person's true self. This creates a flawed notion of the time period, yet there are times where a biopic is created with truthful richness and this so happens to be one of those times.As the title explains, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is pretty much that and, of course, the events that led up to the act. Jesse (Brad Pitt) decides that he will attempt one last robbery and call his career quits after that. Yet after the feat paranoia crawls into Jesse as he begins to debate whether members of his last outing might in fact take the large bounty that plagues him. Over time he becomes interested in Robert Ford (Casey Affleck), a nineteen year old who has idolized Jesse since his childhood but discovers that the outlaw hero is not what he appears.From the very opening scene the film captures you in its Western setting, and the authenticity of the period of the outlaw Jesse James is virtually realistic, albeit a few historical inaccuracies. Though if you aren't well versed in the history of Jesse James you won't have much to worry about, as these inaccuracies are relatively minor and doesn't impact on the overall feel of the characters, and story. The film is slow and almost action-less. For the most part this suitably helps the films haunting veneer. But beyond the realism and atmosphere, the film has an excellent way of never defining a definite hero or villain. Yes, it is obvious how certain characters are to be finally viewed, but Jesse is not the heroic outlaw he is perceived to be. He is mocking and willingly to kill needlessly. As well, Ford is not just the coward he is made out to be. He's a fragile character who has good intentions but his youthfulness does not allow him to see further then his actions.Once again Brad Pitt proves a wonder to watch, with his portrayal of Jesse James being one of his best. You can feel the cold, calculated nuances of Pitt's acting and the love and compassion his character is capable of. His acting his realistic and he is supported wonderfully by the rest of the cast, especially Casey Affleck, who on par with Pitt. Affleck has never struck me as being that great an actor, but his performance was nothing less than amazing. He exudes a creepy nervousness that is just waiting to burst into something more.There is, as well, an accompanying narrator. Who this person is remains a mystery, but who he is, is never ever the point. The narrator (Hugh Ross) like all narrators, serves as the story's guide, pointing out information of extreme importance, In fact, while the film is long, it could have been longer were it not for the narrator. He brings about certain bits of information throughout the film which adds depth to various characters, without these particulars having to be shown. One such time explains how Frank James (Sam Shepard) felt after the death of his brother Jesse, but we never see the character post-Jesse's death. It appears like a quick scheme to get more story development without showing more, but its execution is practically flawless. The music department is pretty thin: the majority of the film plays without music whatsoever, and when music is used, it's done so as a transition point from one main story arc to the nest. Best yet, it doesn't feel out of place and only goes to enhance the somber atmosphere of the film itself.If there is anything stopping this film from reaching greatness, it would be pacing issues. The film is just a little too long for its own good. While its final length cannot be cut by much, as every scene portrayed is of utmost importance, some scenes do linger on a few seconds too long. Much of the additional runtime comes from the director's attempt at adding abstract, yet serene, images of the environment, and just being too art-like. This is partly in due to the great number of times the director, Andrew Dominik, tries these shots, and also because every time this is performed, the main focus is always in the middle. While this is particularly the function of having an images centerpiece in the middle for emphasis, it just happens far too often and the art-like nature of the film loses its appeal. Still the director does indeed have some real highpoints, especially the beginning of the day of Jesse James death, where we are greeted with a splash of nervousness in regards to Ford. Even towards the end of the film the director experiments and with great results, adding much depth with symbolism. The scenes that are up to this quality show the ability the director has, but its shame he falls into a mediocre pattern.No sex and no nudity although there is a scene involving one man walking on a woman who is using the bathroom. Language use is kept to a minimum and violence, while infrequent, is violent and realistic.The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, sadly, misses its mark by a few inches. The story is engaging, if a little inaccurate and a little too much to digest in regards to the films length; the acting is of a sublime quality; the music is well placed and fits the films overall mood nicely, and the cinematography is absolutely breathtaking in its simplicity, but becomes overused. If you can survive till the films conclusion, and honestly if you cannot then it is a real shame, you will have watched one of the best films to grace 2007. The name of Jesse James still lives on, but now in a far more grand state.-- Full version available at http://cruizd.blogspot.com –

Don't read the title of the film unless you want to be spoiled

tt0443680

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford 9-3-08 Don't read the title of the film unless you want to be spoiled...oh wait too late. Yeah that seems to be the point. When people speak of films often the endings are brought up as the tipping point between good or bad. So much is made of having that "good" ending. What constitutes good seems to be a matter of taste. The girl getting the boy or the bad guy getting put away by the square jawed hero. What if when you sit down to view a film you already know exactly how its going to end...that by traditional standards it will end "badly"? Such a film would have to be more about the journey wouldn't it? TAOJJBTCRF is all about the journey to that moment the title prophesied. Its also a film concerned with the dispersity that exists between celebrity/legend and reality. Jesse isn't Robin Hood with a six shooter and Robert isn't the treacherous villain...the truth lies somewhere in between. Casey Affleck gives an incredibly nuanced performance that is quite literally a show stealer. Everyone else is on time as well including Mr. Pitt and Sam Rockwell. Visually the film is contemplative...filled with time elapsed shots of the clouds, lushly photographed western vistas and sets that feel authentic. The pace of the film reminds one of a novel rather than short story. It takes its time and to those with a.d.d. might be labeled "borring"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-258

ur2745165

title: Don't read the title of the film unless you want to be spoiled review: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford 9-3-08 Don't read the title of the film unless you want to be spoiled...oh wait too late. Yeah that seems to be the point. When people speak of films often the endings are brought up as the tipping point between good or bad. So much is made of having that "good" ending. What constitutes good seems to be a matter of taste. The girl getting the boy or the bad guy getting put away by the square jawed hero. What if when you sit down to view a film you already know exactly how its going to end...that by traditional standards it will end "badly"? Such a film would have to be more about the journey wouldn't it? TAOJJBTCRF is all about the journey to that moment the title prophesied. Its also a film concerned with the dispersity that exists between celebrity/legend and reality. Jesse isn't Robin Hood with a six shooter and Robert isn't the treacherous villain...the truth lies somewhere in between. Casey Affleck gives an incredibly nuanced performance that is quite literally a show stealer. Everyone else is on time as well including Mr. Pitt and Sam Rockwell. Visually the film is contemplative...filled with time elapsed shots of the clouds, lushly photographed western vistas and sets that feel authentic. The pace of the film reminds one of a novel rather than short story. It takes its time and to those with a.d.d. might be labeled "borring"

Astonishingly beautiful, bluntly original...a masterpiece

tt0443680

It's been a great year for films, and right now, this one is my favorite. I went without knowing the source material, and had only read some reviews which were mixed. I expected a pretentious mess, but instead was enthralled. I haven't seen a film that was as original as this one, that is, it references no other. Comparing it to the work of Terrence Malick is only valid because he's another unique director (who included fields of waving wheat). This has a potent narrative pull.I don't remember seeing a film that fuses images, acting, music, meticulous period detail in its art direction and mood so seamlessly. Despite claims that it's overlong, each scene--all unexpected--moves the action forward. The title tells us what's going to happen. We're left to see why...and when. So there's incredible tension leading up to the killing. While all the performers are extraordinary, Casey Affleck dominates this group of psychopaths so successfully that everyone else looks quite normal (he out Norman's Norman Bates). His very complex character is so thoroughly laid out before us that the aftermath of his notorious act disappoints us as much as it did Robert Ford.Because this film is so frankly original, I think people might resist it. But if you buy your ticket without expectation (this is not a Western; it's a psychological exploration of a wide range of deviants), you're in for an astonishing experience.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-25

ur0590820

title: Astonishingly beautiful, bluntly original...a masterpiece review: It's been a great year for films, and right now, this one is my favorite. I went without knowing the source material, and had only read some reviews which were mixed. I expected a pretentious mess, but instead was enthralled. I haven't seen a film that was as original as this one, that is, it references no other. Comparing it to the work of Terrence Malick is only valid because he's another unique director (who included fields of waving wheat). This has a potent narrative pull.I don't remember seeing a film that fuses images, acting, music, meticulous period detail in its art direction and mood so seamlessly. Despite claims that it's overlong, each scene--all unexpected--moves the action forward. The title tells us what's going to happen. We're left to see why...and when. So there's incredible tension leading up to the killing. While all the performers are extraordinary, Casey Affleck dominates this group of psychopaths so successfully that everyone else looks quite normal (he out Norman's Norman Bates). His very complex character is so thoroughly laid out before us that the aftermath of his notorious act disappoints us as much as it did Robert Ford.Because this film is so frankly original, I think people might resist it. But if you buy your ticket without expectation (this is not a Western; it's a psychological exploration of a wide range of deviants), you're in for an astonishing experience.

The Shooting of an Olde Worlde Epic by a New World Filmmaker.

tt0443680

This classical western draws us into 1800s Americana so richly that we feel our teeth rotting from lack of dentistry not invented yet.Written and directed by Andrew Dominik (from a book by Ron Hansen), THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD is a study in authenticity; the set dressing, weaponry, music, the arcane vernacular of the characters, even the wordy title itself transports us back to grainy film and honky-tonk pianos, thrusting us bodily into the grimy, wild, paranoid frontier that was romanticized beyond its harsh reality.Dominik's photoplay is a deconstruction and a rambling paean to a bygone era. And way too long for the iPod generation...Jesse James (foreboding Brad Pitt) is already a legend when we meet him. Nineteen year old, Robert Ford (whining Casey Affleck) is obsessed with everything Jesse, collecting and poring over every dimestore paperback featuring the outlaw, now starstruck that he rides with the man himself. Vouched for by his brother Charley (Sam Rockwell), Robert comes onboard a ragtag new James Gang assembled for one last job by Jesse and brother Frank (mighty Sam Shepard).Even Jesse senses there is something peculiar about Robert's hero worship: "I can't figure it out: Do you wanna be like me - or do you wanna be me?" A tragic, insecure, yet dangerously ambitious runt, Robert Ford wants the fame that riding alongside the infamous Jesse James will bring. When the gang fragments and Robert finds himself still a nobody, he sees one last stab at fame in being Jesse James's assassin.A narrator lifts passages directly from the Ron Hansen book that inspired the film. Not only is there an ancient poetry in the words: "...and the omens promised bad luck which moated and dungeoned him," the accompanying scenes look like 1800s photographs, with anamorphic lenses blurring the edges of the screen. There is so much detailed thought that has gone into making this movie experience an ancient wonder that-- --it is almost a pain to watch! You heard me, Movie Aficionado. ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES seems to come at us through a time warp from the 1800s, as every aspect that elevates it also detracts from its "modern" enjoyment. It might be called "controlled direction" but we can also say that events unfold in this movie with the rapidity of swimming through tar; we can call it challenging to listen to the olde worlde vernacular, but most of the time, it is ear-strain, and I had to turn on the English subtitles ("for the hearing impaired" – that always gets me!) if I was ever to decipher their jargon: "I'll say, How come an off-scouring of creation like you is still sucking air when so many of mine are in coffins? I'll say, How did you get to reach your 20th birthday without leaking out all over your clothes? And if I don't like his attitude, I will slit that phildoodle so deep he will flop on the floor like a fish!" Without subtitles, you ask yourself, "Did he just say what I thought he said?"ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES is very successful at creating the paranoia of Jesse and all those around him, Jesse unceremoniously killing ex-gang members if he caught a whiff of betrayal in the air. He may have been the prettiest of the gang, but he was also the most unbalanced, prone to mood swings that would make a high maintenance girlfriend look almost sane.Though the film's title suggests Jesse James was an honorable man betrayed, we realize its irony in the film's depiction of Jesse as a wary coward himself, so paranoid that he would stoop to any lengths to stay one step ahead of the law or the people who might betray him, not averse to torturing young boys for information or shooting friends in the back.This is not a shoot-em-up western, yet all the violence is sudden and unflinching, therefore more dreadful than the glamorized violence we've grown inured to. The realism of the guns sounding like cap pistols and head-smacks sounding like bone on meat makes us realize how much fantasy we've been listening to all these years, from the cannon reports of FISTFUL OF DOLLARS to the wet-towel punches of any John Wayne west-fest.On April 3, 1882, Robert Ford shot Jesse James in the back of the head. Jesse was not wearing his guns.For a while, Robert Ford seemed to get what he wanted, as he became more recognizable than the president, touring with a stage play recreating Jesse's final moments, with his brother Charley playing Jesse and Robert reprising his own ignominious role.Only after Jesse's death do we realize this tale is Ford's point of view, as the movie continues for another half hour in a world where Jesses James is dead. Robert's star would rise in the aftermath of the killing, only to plummet as the Legend of Jesse James grew into romanticized pulp.By the time Robert Ford was shot down himself for being the "coward who shot Jesse James" - by a nobody named Edward O'Kelly - his spirit was at such a low ebb that he welcomed it.An ambitious movie, with power names on the production credits: David Valdes (UNFORGIVEN), Brad Grey (THE DEPARTED), Ridley Scott (AMERICAN GANGSTER), and Brad Pitt himself; DP Roger Deakins (NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN); music by Nick Cave - even a cameo by Clinton dogsbody, James Carville, playing an iron-fisted governor, of all things. Andrew Dominik brings back epic, emotional film-making to this world stunted with Transformers and Iron Men.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-281

ur2446936

title: The Shooting of an Olde Worlde Epic by a New World Filmmaker. review: This classical western draws us into 1800s Americana so richly that we feel our teeth rotting from lack of dentistry not invented yet.Written and directed by Andrew Dominik (from a book by Ron Hansen), THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD is a study in authenticity; the set dressing, weaponry, music, the arcane vernacular of the characters, even the wordy title itself transports us back to grainy film and honky-tonk pianos, thrusting us bodily into the grimy, wild, paranoid frontier that was romanticized beyond its harsh reality.Dominik's photoplay is a deconstruction and a rambling paean to a bygone era. And way too long for the iPod generation...Jesse James (foreboding Brad Pitt) is already a legend when we meet him. Nineteen year old, Robert Ford (whining Casey Affleck) is obsessed with everything Jesse, collecting and poring over every dimestore paperback featuring the outlaw, now starstruck that he rides with the man himself. Vouched for by his brother Charley (Sam Rockwell), Robert comes onboard a ragtag new James Gang assembled for one last job by Jesse and brother Frank (mighty Sam Shepard).Even Jesse senses there is something peculiar about Robert's hero worship: "I can't figure it out: Do you wanna be like me - or do you wanna be me?" A tragic, insecure, yet dangerously ambitious runt, Robert Ford wants the fame that riding alongside the infamous Jesse James will bring. When the gang fragments and Robert finds himself still a nobody, he sees one last stab at fame in being Jesse James's assassin.A narrator lifts passages directly from the Ron Hansen book that inspired the film. Not only is there an ancient poetry in the words: "...and the omens promised bad luck which moated and dungeoned him," the accompanying scenes look like 1800s photographs, with anamorphic lenses blurring the edges of the screen. There is so much detailed thought that has gone into making this movie experience an ancient wonder that-- --it is almost a pain to watch! You heard me, Movie Aficionado. ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES seems to come at us through a time warp from the 1800s, as every aspect that elevates it also detracts from its "modern" enjoyment. It might be called "controlled direction" but we can also say that events unfold in this movie with the rapidity of swimming through tar; we can call it challenging to listen to the olde worlde vernacular, but most of the time, it is ear-strain, and I had to turn on the English subtitles ("for the hearing impaired" – that always gets me!) if I was ever to decipher their jargon: "I'll say, How come an off-scouring of creation like you is still sucking air when so many of mine are in coffins? I'll say, How did you get to reach your 20th birthday without leaking out all over your clothes? And if I don't like his attitude, I will slit that phildoodle so deep he will flop on the floor like a fish!" Without subtitles, you ask yourself, "Did he just say what I thought he said?"ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES is very successful at creating the paranoia of Jesse and all those around him, Jesse unceremoniously killing ex-gang members if he caught a whiff of betrayal in the air. He may have been the prettiest of the gang, but he was also the most unbalanced, prone to mood swings that would make a high maintenance girlfriend look almost sane.Though the film's title suggests Jesse James was an honorable man betrayed, we realize its irony in the film's depiction of Jesse as a wary coward himself, so paranoid that he would stoop to any lengths to stay one step ahead of the law or the people who might betray him, not averse to torturing young boys for information or shooting friends in the back.This is not a shoot-em-up western, yet all the violence is sudden and unflinching, therefore more dreadful than the glamorized violence we've grown inured to. The realism of the guns sounding like cap pistols and head-smacks sounding like bone on meat makes us realize how much fantasy we've been listening to all these years, from the cannon reports of FISTFUL OF DOLLARS to the wet-towel punches of any John Wayne west-fest.On April 3, 1882, Robert Ford shot Jesse James in the back of the head. Jesse was not wearing his guns.For a while, Robert Ford seemed to get what he wanted, as he became more recognizable than the president, touring with a stage play recreating Jesse's final moments, with his brother Charley playing Jesse and Robert reprising his own ignominious role.Only after Jesse's death do we realize this tale is Ford's point of view, as the movie continues for another half hour in a world where Jesses James is dead. Robert's star would rise in the aftermath of the killing, only to plummet as the Legend of Jesse James grew into romanticized pulp.By the time Robert Ford was shot down himself for being the "coward who shot Jesse James" - by a nobody named Edward O'Kelly - his spirit was at such a low ebb that he welcomed it.An ambitious movie, with power names on the production credits: David Valdes (UNFORGIVEN), Brad Grey (THE DEPARTED), Ridley Scott (AMERICAN GANGSTER), and Brad Pitt himself; DP Roger Deakins (NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN); music by Nick Cave - even a cameo by Clinton dogsbody, James Carville, playing an iron-fisted governor, of all things. Andrew Dominik brings back epic, emotional film-making to this world stunted with Transformers and Iron Men.

A dark, bleak, gritty biography that some how captivates and pulls you in

tt0443680

I wasn't sure what to make of The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford when I was first watching it. Was it nothing more than a Brad Pitt vehicle looking to score some artistic points? It had this ominous narration that felt like an elongated episode of A&E's Biography. And as it continued all the pieces began to fall into place and I was pulled into this dark, paranoid, gritty, dust ridden world of Jesse James and his descent into his own destruction. I'm not one to call out the artistic greats of a film unless it entertains as well and I'm not sure that this film would appeal to everyone certainly but I'm an enormous history fan, and love Westerns and this one just felt real from beginning to end and the actors in the film really knocked this one out of the park with some really powerful performances. They are very subtle and it really starts to sink in on you about half way through. You feel like you're being drawn into everything that they are and you wait and wait for the moment you know is coming right from the minute you see the title of the film. And when it happens...it doesn't disappoint. The Assassination is shocking and violent and so sudden that you will reel back and...if you're a little morose like me...watch it again...in slow motion...because it's brilliantly done. Everything in the film is so subtle right up to the Assassination and then you're just rocked.Brad Pitt is Jesse James and gives one of the more subtle performances. I like Pitt, he's an amazing Hollywood star but he also has some incredible talent proved in such amazing roles as 12 Monkeys, Meet Joe Black, and the amazing Se7en. This role is so quiet at first and you can't believe that this family man is the cold blooded killer but that is the whole idea. No one had any idea and throughout the film he has a descent into almost complete madness. This film takes the liberty that he set up his own death ultimately not being able to live with himself and his paranoia. Pitt is excellent. I really wasn't sure about the Oscar nominated performance of Casey Affleck who plays the coward himself Robert Ford but once again he really grew on me. Ford has all these very distinct personality traits and almost tics as he lives and idolizes Jesse but essentially trades his passion for glory as they say. He'll do anything for number one which is him. You go through so many emotions with his character...you despise him, pity him, relish him, hate him, and feel his own self loathing. It really is quite the performance and Pitt and Affleck play off each other brilliantly. Paul Schneider is a deliciously slimy character Dick Liddil. He's just a real scum bag and you love to hate him all the way through. Sam Rockwell is good as the nervous brother to Affleck's Ford. His character has a lot of emotional moments in the film and he does well. Jeremy Renner is also good as rough around the edges cowboy and Jesse's cousin. And Mary-Louise Parker has a small role as Jesse's wife but it's a good role although she's barely recognizable in it. One of the truly terrific roles in the film is that of the Narrator Hugh Ross who has an amazing voice and it really did make an impact having him narrate certain aspects of Jesse James' life. It felt like a biography and yet you were living it with them.If anything this is the furthest from a typical Hollywood Western and yet still holds some of the elements from that genre. There isn't any distinct bad guys or good guys, white hats or black hats, dusty towns with an angry sheriff. This feels like the real thing with brilliantly bleak landscape and gray clouds all around and tiny hand built cabins where they live. Train robberies, and gun shoot outs and horse riding are plenty but it all feels like it could have happened and was happening right in front of you. There were actually several scenes that were so brilliantly filmed (the film was also nominated for an Oscar in cinematography) that will literally make you want to pause the film and just look at it. Simplicity and yet completely moving. I would call The Assassination of Jesse James a historical epic at it's finest but in the most subtle of ways. I keep using that word because it is exactly what the film is all about subtly that will jump up and turn into a very powerful film when you least expect it. Rather than ending the film with James' assassination we get to see the following events surrounding his death including a very excellent re-creation of the infamous photos of his body. We also get to follow Robert Ford in his life following his infamous Assassination on James right up to his own death which I think was very clever of the film makers. If you love history, or really do appreciate a beautifully shot, well acted, powerful film you won't be disappointed with this one. Two and a half hours feels like an hour. 9/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-249

ur1697212

title: A dark, bleak, gritty biography that some how captivates and pulls you in review: I wasn't sure what to make of The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford when I was first watching it. Was it nothing more than a Brad Pitt vehicle looking to score some artistic points? It had this ominous narration that felt like an elongated episode of A&E's Biography. And as it continued all the pieces began to fall into place and I was pulled into this dark, paranoid, gritty, dust ridden world of Jesse James and his descent into his own destruction. I'm not one to call out the artistic greats of a film unless it entertains as well and I'm not sure that this film would appeal to everyone certainly but I'm an enormous history fan, and love Westerns and this one just felt real from beginning to end and the actors in the film really knocked this one out of the park with some really powerful performances. They are very subtle and it really starts to sink in on you about half way through. You feel like you're being drawn into everything that they are and you wait and wait for the moment you know is coming right from the minute you see the title of the film. And when it happens...it doesn't disappoint. The Assassination is shocking and violent and so sudden that you will reel back and...if you're a little morose like me...watch it again...in slow motion...because it's brilliantly done. Everything in the film is so subtle right up to the Assassination and then you're just rocked.Brad Pitt is Jesse James and gives one of the more subtle performances. I like Pitt, he's an amazing Hollywood star but he also has some incredible talent proved in such amazing roles as 12 Monkeys, Meet Joe Black, and the amazing Se7en. This role is so quiet at first and you can't believe that this family man is the cold blooded killer but that is the whole idea. No one had any idea and throughout the film he has a descent into almost complete madness. This film takes the liberty that he set up his own death ultimately not being able to live with himself and his paranoia. Pitt is excellent. I really wasn't sure about the Oscar nominated performance of Casey Affleck who plays the coward himself Robert Ford but once again he really grew on me. Ford has all these very distinct personality traits and almost tics as he lives and idolizes Jesse but essentially trades his passion for glory as they say. He'll do anything for number one which is him. You go through so many emotions with his character...you despise him, pity him, relish him, hate him, and feel his own self loathing. It really is quite the performance and Pitt and Affleck play off each other brilliantly. Paul Schneider is a deliciously slimy character Dick Liddil. He's just a real scum bag and you love to hate him all the way through. Sam Rockwell is good as the nervous brother to Affleck's Ford. His character has a lot of emotional moments in the film and he does well. Jeremy Renner is also good as rough around the edges cowboy and Jesse's cousin. And Mary-Louise Parker has a small role as Jesse's wife but it's a good role although she's barely recognizable in it. One of the truly terrific roles in the film is that of the Narrator Hugh Ross who has an amazing voice and it really did make an impact having him narrate certain aspects of Jesse James' life. It felt like a biography and yet you were living it with them.If anything this is the furthest from a typical Hollywood Western and yet still holds some of the elements from that genre. There isn't any distinct bad guys or good guys, white hats or black hats, dusty towns with an angry sheriff. This feels like the real thing with brilliantly bleak landscape and gray clouds all around and tiny hand built cabins where they live. Train robberies, and gun shoot outs and horse riding are plenty but it all feels like it could have happened and was happening right in front of you. There were actually several scenes that were so brilliantly filmed (the film was also nominated for an Oscar in cinematography) that will literally make you want to pause the film and just look at it. Simplicity and yet completely moving. I would call The Assassination of Jesse James a historical epic at it's finest but in the most subtle of ways. I keep using that word because it is exactly what the film is all about subtly that will jump up and turn into a very powerful film when you least expect it. Rather than ending the film with James' assassination we get to see the following events surrounding his death including a very excellent re-creation of the infamous photos of his body. We also get to follow Robert Ford in his life following his infamous Assassination on James right up to his own death which I think was very clever of the film makers. If you love history, or really do appreciate a beautifully shot, well acted, powerful film you won't be disappointed with this one. Two and a half hours feels like an hour. 9/10

Ingmar Bergman does 'Deadwood'. Not an action western.

tt0443680

TAOJJBTCRF is a long dramatised documentary of what the title says. Some people here didn't catch the suspense that runs through it - basically who will die next? - and weren't seduced by the top-notch period recreation. Some picked up on the feeling that it might be bit of a Brad Pitt vanity project, allowing him to play a pantomime villain for once. He certainly does Jesse James like a cross between a young Burl Ives and a Midwest Tony Soprano. But for me, it worked. It sagged when the gang members became hard to distinguish, the casual disappearance of Frank James was a bit well, casual, and as others have said the pistol shots seem strangely muffled (a period detail?). To be honest you do get to the point where you feel 'I've watched two hours, I might as well stick with it', but if you take it at face value as a historical psychological study - of Bob Ford and of Jesse (and how the legend was what people wanted), and don't take it as seriously as it occasionally takes itself (the voice-over is a flaw in that respect), you'll be able to enjoy how beautifully made it is. It's epic without having a huge cast or massive number of setpieces, and rewards concentration, a bit like a long stage play put on screen. If you 'get' Ingmar Bergman movies, or liked Deadwood, you'll probably enjoy it. If not, move along, nothing to see here.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-210

ur1148847

title: Ingmar Bergman does 'Deadwood'. Not an action western. review: TAOJJBTCRF is a long dramatised documentary of what the title says. Some people here didn't catch the suspense that runs through it - basically who will die next? - and weren't seduced by the top-notch period recreation. Some picked up on the feeling that it might be bit of a Brad Pitt vanity project, allowing him to play a pantomime villain for once. He certainly does Jesse James like a cross between a young Burl Ives and a Midwest Tony Soprano. But for me, it worked. It sagged when the gang members became hard to distinguish, the casual disappearance of Frank James was a bit well, casual, and as others have said the pistol shots seem strangely muffled (a period detail?). To be honest you do get to the point where you feel 'I've watched two hours, I might as well stick with it', but if you take it at face value as a historical psychological study - of Bob Ford and of Jesse (and how the legend was what people wanted), and don't take it as seriously as it occasionally takes itself (the voice-over is a flaw in that respect), you'll be able to enjoy how beautifully made it is. It's epic without having a huge cast or massive number of setpieces, and rewards concentration, a bit like a long stage play put on screen. If you 'get' Ingmar Bergman movies, or liked Deadwood, you'll probably enjoy it. If not, move along, nothing to see here.

Great Story

tt0443680

Jesse James (Pitt) is wary of his new gang since the old gang was either dead or in prison, and he knows something is up. After all there is a large reward on him, dead or alive, and he is retired now…..more or less. I thought the title was too long, and then I saw the movie and the title is exactly right. This is perhaps the most comprehensive story about Jesse James, and Robert Ford. All we ever heard in the past was that James went to fix a picture on the wall and Ford shot him in the back. That's all we ever heard until now.The story is slow, there is narration, and some scenes linger but all are necessary and artfully done. It's like watching a Ken Burns documentary come to life (Burns did excellent documentaries for TV on the Civil War, American Baseball, Jazz, WWII and many more using narration and still pictures that were available for the times) or reading the novel without actually reading the novel, but getting the full flavor of the novel. Say what? Now all of this couldn't have been experienced if it wasn't for the novel by Ron Hansen.There is no language in the movie but the new gang members, in the beginning as they sat around a camp fire, do use code words to describe a woman's parts. It wasn't necessary, not funny and they were probably incorporated to give us a sense of outlaw camp-fire talk, I suppose. Also, when the gang robbed the train (their last), most actors had troubles with keeping their bandanas on over their noses. Kind of funny now that I think about it. Casey Affleck did a great job (an Oscar performance? Maybe) as Robert Ford, but let's face it, he looks so much like brother Ben, that sometimes you see Ben when watching Casey. They look so much alike and have similar facial contortions. Maybe a mustache would help. Mary-Louise Parker was wasted here but maybe she just wanted to be in the movie at any cost. James Carville (political analyst) was good as the governor. Sam Shepard, as Frank James, was in and out so fast you hardly knew he was in here. The performances of the rest of the cast were excellent. As for Brad Pitt, he was Jesse James in every sense of the word that we have come to fantasize about. Can't get better than that. Yes, a great story. Violence:Yes; Sex:NO; Nudity:No; Language:No

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-139

ur15857362

title: Great Story review: Jesse James (Pitt) is wary of his new gang since the old gang was either dead or in prison, and he knows something is up. After all there is a large reward on him, dead or alive, and he is retired now…..more or less. I thought the title was too long, and then I saw the movie and the title is exactly right. This is perhaps the most comprehensive story about Jesse James, and Robert Ford. All we ever heard in the past was that James went to fix a picture on the wall and Ford shot him in the back. That's all we ever heard until now.The story is slow, there is narration, and some scenes linger but all are necessary and artfully done. It's like watching a Ken Burns documentary come to life (Burns did excellent documentaries for TV on the Civil War, American Baseball, Jazz, WWII and many more using narration and still pictures that were available for the times) or reading the novel without actually reading the novel, but getting the full flavor of the novel. Say what? Now all of this couldn't have been experienced if it wasn't for the novel by Ron Hansen.There is no language in the movie but the new gang members, in the beginning as they sat around a camp fire, do use code words to describe a woman's parts. It wasn't necessary, not funny and they were probably incorporated to give us a sense of outlaw camp-fire talk, I suppose. Also, when the gang robbed the train (their last), most actors had troubles with keeping their bandanas on over their noses. Kind of funny now that I think about it. Casey Affleck did a great job (an Oscar performance? Maybe) as Robert Ford, but let's face it, he looks so much like brother Ben, that sometimes you see Ben when watching Casey. They look so much alike and have similar facial contortions. Maybe a mustache would help. Mary-Louise Parker was wasted here but maybe she just wanted to be in the movie at any cost. James Carville (political analyst) was good as the governor. Sam Shepard, as Frank James, was in and out so fast you hardly knew he was in here. The performances of the rest of the cast were excellent. As for Brad Pitt, he was Jesse James in every sense of the word that we have come to fantasize about. Can't get better than that. Yes, a great story. Violence:Yes; Sex:NO; Nudity:No; Language:No

psychological study/ poetic docudrama

tt0443680

As other admirers of this film have noted, the majority of those voicing complaint against this film are blaming it for being a bad Western, when in fact it isn't a Western at all. It is an elegiac domestic tragedy, a folk-narrative, a 'docudrama,'a psychological study of rural petty criminals and the myths they would like to perpetuate about themselves to avoid the pettiness of their lives. But it is not a Western. It has more in common with the old Robert Mitchum film about post-WWII moonshiners, "Thunder Road," than with "I shot Jesse James." But of course, unlike "Thunder Road," intended to appeal to younger drive-in theater audiences, the present Jesse James film is a straight drama intended for a mature audience. So the other complaint against the film, that it is very slow, is somewhat justified, but misses the point. This is not an action/ adventure film. I have no problem with those who do not like elegiac drams, but those who express disappointment that this is not a Western or an action film are simply off base. Why not complain that "The Dark Knight" is not a successful romantic comedy? This would make as much sense.Taken on its own terms, the film, despite its length, is sometimes painfully suspenseful, even knowing the story ahead of time, because what we are really watching are convolutions of character, where every real action, every word spoken or misspoken reveals a little more of the psychology and personalities of the characters. Also, there's no doubt the off-screen narration repeatedly hints that there might be a moral center to be found in the world of James and Bob Ford - but none exists. We certainly have some sense of what is wrong when we see it happen, but no real guide as to what is right.The narration of the film frequently achieves real poetry. The dialog is at once folksy and crisp. The acting is uniformly brilliant, even from Mr. Pitt, of whom I am no fan. The editing could be tighter in spots, but is frequently on target, given the quirky pacing of the story. The cinematography includes some of the most beautiful outdoor cinematography I've seen in many years. It's a sad story, but worthy of attention and praise. And no it's not a Western. But its a dam' good movie.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-278

ur4627372

title: psychological study/ poetic docudrama review: As other admirers of this film have noted, the majority of those voicing complaint against this film are blaming it for being a bad Western, when in fact it isn't a Western at all. It is an elegiac domestic tragedy, a folk-narrative, a 'docudrama,'a psychological study of rural petty criminals and the myths they would like to perpetuate about themselves to avoid the pettiness of their lives. But it is not a Western. It has more in common with the old Robert Mitchum film about post-WWII moonshiners, "Thunder Road," than with "I shot Jesse James." But of course, unlike "Thunder Road," intended to appeal to younger drive-in theater audiences, the present Jesse James film is a straight drama intended for a mature audience. So the other complaint against the film, that it is very slow, is somewhat justified, but misses the point. This is not an action/ adventure film. I have no problem with those who do not like elegiac drams, but those who express disappointment that this is not a Western or an action film are simply off base. Why not complain that "The Dark Knight" is not a successful romantic comedy? This would make as much sense.Taken on its own terms, the film, despite its length, is sometimes painfully suspenseful, even knowing the story ahead of time, because what we are really watching are convolutions of character, where every real action, every word spoken or misspoken reveals a little more of the psychology and personalities of the characters. Also, there's no doubt the off-screen narration repeatedly hints that there might be a moral center to be found in the world of James and Bob Ford - but none exists. We certainly have some sense of what is wrong when we see it happen, but no real guide as to what is right.The narration of the film frequently achieves real poetry. The dialog is at once folksy and crisp. The acting is uniformly brilliant, even from Mr. Pitt, of whom I am no fan. The editing could be tighter in spots, but is frequently on target, given the quirky pacing of the story. The cinematography includes some of the most beautiful outdoor cinematography I've seen in many years. It's a sad story, but worthy of attention and praise. And no it's not a Western. But its a dam' good movie.

Heroism Is In the Eye of the Beholder

tt0443680

How sad and painful the story of Robert Ford is and how grimly telling it is of the shallow and insensitive nature of people as a mass. It is a western, yet it's a very patient and ominous western that plays out more like a Terence Malick film than a John Ford or Sam Peckinpah one. Westerns, by the very nature of the backdrop they set for their stories, portray primitive and unwittingly obsolete ways of life confronted modern technological or social changes. This may be depicted by showing conflict between natives and settlers, or by showing ranchers being threatened by the Industrial Revolution. American Westerns of the 1940s and 1950s emphasize honor and sacrifice. Westerns from the 1960s and 1970s have a more negative examination, lionizing a disloyal anti-hero and bringing to light the cynicism, viciousness and discrimination of the American West. The earlier westerns skim the glorious surface of the time and the later ones dig deep into the brutal nature of people in the era, but neither approach is bad. However the typical American-made western uses these elements to tell a simple morality tale that leaves room for barfights, shootouts and the salvage of helpless, entirely dependent damsels in distress. The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford exceeds this by combining the two views and creating a dark, cruel portrait of a dark, cruel time. When the movie ended, I sat staring at the screen, my thoughts entirely arrested by what I had just watched.The only aggravation of which I can think is the film's narration, which gives away subtext right as we would be absorbing it just as clearly without the narration. Sometimes the narrator is needed, sometimes it appears that the narrator baby-steps us through a scene that might be too hard for our little brains to comprehend. I still dismiss it with the wave of my hands, however, because it is there more for the purpose of setting old storyteller sort of feel of the time, and storytelling is the axis of the lives of both Jesse James and Robert Ford, and how they came to meet.Brad Pitt's portrayal of Jesse James is greatest performance, bar none. He is so chilling, not only because he can alternately appear so convincingly vulnerable and lethally menacing uninterrupted from one moment to the next, but also because he gives you the distinct worrying impression that he could truly live a life completely alone, leaving a thorough variable for the outcomes of anyone in his presence. There are many scenes with James where the most telling things he does are very difficult to script and were likely moments where the actor is given to impulse and improvisation. These happen to be some of his best scenes because Pitt renders him with a very clear and acute understanding of his careful, private, manipulative, sensitive personality. In a moment when someone lies to him, well or not well, Jesse doesn't make a very telling face. Pitt simply wears a blank, expectant expression that opens up a gash in the scene where we feel just as certainly as he does that what's just been said doesn't fit. He radiates a subsequent awkwardness to all around him, including the audience, and he somehow seems untouched by it, the only person still appearing comfortable in the room.There is an almost frighteningly natural chemistry between Casey Affleck, who plays the weak yet eager and ambitious Robert Ford, and his idol, Jesse James. His submissive yet obsessive character, hungry for attention and admiration, and James's calmly dominant and sadistic ambiguity towards him is epitomal of real, searing, almost borderline sexual connection between two people who were almost bound by fate to meet and affect each other.Sam Rockwell, one of the most lovable, natural and underused actors working right now, is always a delight to see, his trademark happy-go-lucky imperviousness creating great spark as Robert Ford's older brother Charley, who laughs along with Robert's tormentors but very slowly reveals a more concerned side when his dense mind begins to realize that it's not all fun and games.Andrew Dominik is an auspiciously promising new filmmaker whose successive efforts will hopefully equal this beautifully shot, giftedly atmospheric, all too real masterpiece, but it's difficult to fathom whether or not they could exceed it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-254

ur8625456

title: Heroism Is In the Eye of the Beholder review: How sad and painful the story of Robert Ford is and how grimly telling it is of the shallow and insensitive nature of people as a mass. It is a western, yet it's a very patient and ominous western that plays out more like a Terence Malick film than a John Ford or Sam Peckinpah one. Westerns, by the very nature of the backdrop they set for their stories, portray primitive and unwittingly obsolete ways of life confronted modern technological or social changes. This may be depicted by showing conflict between natives and settlers, or by showing ranchers being threatened by the Industrial Revolution. American Westerns of the 1940s and 1950s emphasize honor and sacrifice. Westerns from the 1960s and 1970s have a more negative examination, lionizing a disloyal anti-hero and bringing to light the cynicism, viciousness and discrimination of the American West. The earlier westerns skim the glorious surface of the time and the later ones dig deep into the brutal nature of people in the era, but neither approach is bad. However the typical American-made western uses these elements to tell a simple morality tale that leaves room for barfights, shootouts and the salvage of helpless, entirely dependent damsels in distress. The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford exceeds this by combining the two views and creating a dark, cruel portrait of a dark, cruel time. When the movie ended, I sat staring at the screen, my thoughts entirely arrested by what I had just watched.The only aggravation of which I can think is the film's narration, which gives away subtext right as we would be absorbing it just as clearly without the narration. Sometimes the narrator is needed, sometimes it appears that the narrator baby-steps us through a scene that might be too hard for our little brains to comprehend. I still dismiss it with the wave of my hands, however, because it is there more for the purpose of setting old storyteller sort of feel of the time, and storytelling is the axis of the lives of both Jesse James and Robert Ford, and how they came to meet.Brad Pitt's portrayal of Jesse James is greatest performance, bar none. He is so chilling, not only because he can alternately appear so convincingly vulnerable and lethally menacing uninterrupted from one moment to the next, but also because he gives you the distinct worrying impression that he could truly live a life completely alone, leaving a thorough variable for the outcomes of anyone in his presence. There are many scenes with James where the most telling things he does are very difficult to script and were likely moments where the actor is given to impulse and improvisation. These happen to be some of his best scenes because Pitt renders him with a very clear and acute understanding of his careful, private, manipulative, sensitive personality. In a moment when someone lies to him, well or not well, Jesse doesn't make a very telling face. Pitt simply wears a blank, expectant expression that opens up a gash in the scene where we feel just as certainly as he does that what's just been said doesn't fit. He radiates a subsequent awkwardness to all around him, including the audience, and he somehow seems untouched by it, the only person still appearing comfortable in the room.There is an almost frighteningly natural chemistry between Casey Affleck, who plays the weak yet eager and ambitious Robert Ford, and his idol, Jesse James. His submissive yet obsessive character, hungry for attention and admiration, and James's calmly dominant and sadistic ambiguity towards him is epitomal of real, searing, almost borderline sexual connection between two people who were almost bound by fate to meet and affect each other.Sam Rockwell, one of the most lovable, natural and underused actors working right now, is always a delight to see, his trademark happy-go-lucky imperviousness creating great spark as Robert Ford's older brother Charley, who laughs along with Robert's tormentors but very slowly reveals a more concerned side when his dense mind begins to realize that it's not all fun and games.Andrew Dominik is an auspiciously promising new filmmaker whose successive efforts will hopefully equal this beautifully shot, giftedly atmospheric, all too real masterpiece, but it's difficult to fathom whether or not they could exceed it.

A movie as long as its title but beautifully made and acted out!

tt0443680

First of all, I can understand some people not liking this movie. It's pace and style is not just for everybody but having said that, I personally absolutely loved it! Most important thing to know is that this is not a western at all. At least not in the classic sense of the word. It just happens to be a movie that is set in the old west but features none of the typical genre clichés and familiar ingredients. This movie can be more looked upon as a history lesson, being told by some skillful film-makers, both in front and behind the camera's.And that's basically what this movie is; an historical retelling of the Jesse James story, or even a biopic, if you will. And it at all times remains a very authentic feeling and looking one. This means that nothing ever gets exaggerated or glorified. No heroic shootouts or brave characters without fear in this movie. It instead features very real human characters of flesh and blood, with all of their emotions and imperfections. It's not a movie that is in love with its subject but it only, again, tries to tell a true story about true people and where needed, gives its own interpretations on how certain things probably would had transpired, about 120 years ago.And here lies the movie's greatest strength; its authentic look and feeling. And thankfully this also all can be seen back in the movie its characters. I just loved how it showed the good and bad sides of both Jesse James and Robert Ford and how the movie was never picking sides for any of them. It instead tried to create some understanding and sympathy for both of the characters and the movie really succeeded beautifully with this. But this all is also obviously thanks to its actors, who portray all of the movie its most important characters. Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck are both really perfect in their roles. Casey Affleck even got nominated for an Oscar and when you see this movie it's not so hard to see why really. He plays a pretty complex and hard character with much conviction. But with all this talk about Affleck and Pitt, people tend to forget all about Sam Rockwell, who I aways think deserves far more credit than he's ever receiving.It's no spoiler of course that in the end Jesse James is getting killed by Robert Ford. After all, this is in the movie its title! But I must say that the entire execution of it (no pun intended) and the build up to it is done incredibly. It's both really tense and powerful and you're literally holding your breath when it's 'finally' happening. I was absolutely loving the movie its final 30 minutes or so but by saying that I'm not saying that I was bored or not as happy with the movie its first 2 hours.Even though it's a really slowly told movie and doesn't feature much action in it, I can't say that it ever felt like a boring or overlong movie. It was always an interesting movie to watch, thanks to the dynamics between the characters and the way the entire movie got shot and told by director Andrew Dominik, who only makes movies once every few years.And lets not forget about Roger Deakins' cinematography, that gives the movie an even more authentic look and feeling to it. It was a great move to hire him for this movie, since his visual style is perfect for this movie. The main audience will know Deakins' work for basically all of the Coen brothers movies, that often have a sort of similar authentic look and feeling to them.Perhaps you have to be a real lover of cinema or one of the more old school style of film-making to fully enjoy and appreciate this movie but for me it was an absolutely great one to watch!8/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-373

ur1416505

title: A movie as long as its title but beautifully made and acted out! review: First of all, I can understand some people not liking this movie. It's pace and style is not just for everybody but having said that, I personally absolutely loved it! Most important thing to know is that this is not a western at all. At least not in the classic sense of the word. It just happens to be a movie that is set in the old west but features none of the typical genre clichés and familiar ingredients. This movie can be more looked upon as a history lesson, being told by some skillful film-makers, both in front and behind the camera's.And that's basically what this movie is; an historical retelling of the Jesse James story, or even a biopic, if you will. And it at all times remains a very authentic feeling and looking one. This means that nothing ever gets exaggerated or glorified. No heroic shootouts or brave characters without fear in this movie. It instead features very real human characters of flesh and blood, with all of their emotions and imperfections. It's not a movie that is in love with its subject but it only, again, tries to tell a true story about true people and where needed, gives its own interpretations on how certain things probably would had transpired, about 120 years ago.And here lies the movie's greatest strength; its authentic look and feeling. And thankfully this also all can be seen back in the movie its characters. I just loved how it showed the good and bad sides of both Jesse James and Robert Ford and how the movie was never picking sides for any of them. It instead tried to create some understanding and sympathy for both of the characters and the movie really succeeded beautifully with this. But this all is also obviously thanks to its actors, who portray all of the movie its most important characters. Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck are both really perfect in their roles. Casey Affleck even got nominated for an Oscar and when you see this movie it's not so hard to see why really. He plays a pretty complex and hard character with much conviction. But with all this talk about Affleck and Pitt, people tend to forget all about Sam Rockwell, who I aways think deserves far more credit than he's ever receiving.It's no spoiler of course that in the end Jesse James is getting killed by Robert Ford. After all, this is in the movie its title! But I must say that the entire execution of it (no pun intended) and the build up to it is done incredibly. It's both really tense and powerful and you're literally holding your breath when it's 'finally' happening. I was absolutely loving the movie its final 30 minutes or so but by saying that I'm not saying that I was bored or not as happy with the movie its first 2 hours.Even though it's a really slowly told movie and doesn't feature much action in it, I can't say that it ever felt like a boring or overlong movie. It was always an interesting movie to watch, thanks to the dynamics between the characters and the way the entire movie got shot and told by director Andrew Dominik, who only makes movies once every few years.And lets not forget about Roger Deakins' cinematography, that gives the movie an even more authentic look and feeling to it. It was a great move to hire him for this movie, since his visual style is perfect for this movie. The main audience will know Deakins' work for basically all of the Coen brothers movies, that often have a sort of similar authentic look and feeling to them.Perhaps you have to be a real lover of cinema or one of the more old school style of film-making to fully enjoy and appreciate this movie but for me it was an absolutely great one to watch!8/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Not a western! Not a western! Not a western!

tt0443680

I watched this movie finally on DVD and while it had some good not great moments it lacked something. Let me see now, there was no plot, no real tension, the dialog was absolutely boring, no action to speak of, the characters were one dimensional, and the so called Hero(Jesse James) was despicable. Not one character in this movie inspired any remorse in me at the thought of them dieing. The one train robbery that took place was so boring and stupid that it defied logic. Brad Pitts acting abilities were wasted on this show, he did a much much better job in Portraying Achilles in Troy. That movie had some great dialog. In the end this movie can be summed up as a portrayal of one backshooter shooting another backshooter. John Wayne will be rolling over in his grave to think that this movie is called a western. Great movies must have some memorable scenes, memorable dialog, characters that rouse our emotions and we care about, a plot that has us on the edge of our seats, and a purpose for making it. This movie has none of the above and thusly can be said to be mediocre at best.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-259

ur11511110

title: Not a western! Not a western! Not a western! review: I watched this movie finally on DVD and while it had some good not great moments it lacked something. Let me see now, there was no plot, no real tension, the dialog was absolutely boring, no action to speak of, the characters were one dimensional, and the so called Hero(Jesse James) was despicable. Not one character in this movie inspired any remorse in me at the thought of them dieing. The one train robbery that took place was so boring and stupid that it defied logic. Brad Pitts acting abilities were wasted on this show, he did a much much better job in Portraying Achilles in Troy. That movie had some great dialog. In the end this movie can be summed up as a portrayal of one backshooter shooting another backshooter. John Wayne will be rolling over in his grave to think that this movie is called a western. Great movies must have some memorable scenes, memorable dialog, characters that rouse our emotions and we care about, a plot that has us on the edge of our seats, and a purpose for making it. This movie has none of the above and thusly can be said to be mediocre at best.

Yuk... I hated this film

tt0443680

Yuk...... I hated this film. I know this movie is supposed to be sad. Ford's life was one of a guy who killed someone he befriended, and in a dirty way. I wonder why Ford thought people would think his action would be one of a hero. The lighting is dim and entwined with depressing dialog, which makes for ickey and messy film. The directing and script creates the mess of a life these people endured. Plays where Ford reenacted the sick deed of shooting Jessie in the back is painful to watch. Jessie and the clan were negative towards one another displayed in their self centered paranoid criminal lives. Gut wrenching too watch. What comes around goes around is the enduring theme for the viewers to watch. So enduring I fell asleep for twenty minutes during the film. Too enduring for me especially during a cold Drury Febrauary day. I give this film a 2 out of 10. Like watching a slow train wreck of Ford's life. The end is ironic.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-164

ur0453228

title: Yuk... I hated this film review: Yuk...... I hated this film. I know this movie is supposed to be sad. Ford's life was one of a guy who killed someone he befriended, and in a dirty way. I wonder why Ford thought people would think his action would be one of a hero. The lighting is dim and entwined with depressing dialog, which makes for ickey and messy film. The directing and script creates the mess of a life these people endured. Plays where Ford reenacted the sick deed of shooting Jessie in the back is painful to watch. Jessie and the clan were negative towards one another displayed in their self centered paranoid criminal lives. Gut wrenching too watch. What comes around goes around is the enduring theme for the viewers to watch. So enduring I fell asleep for twenty minutes during the film. Too enduring for me especially during a cold Drury Febrauary day. I give this film a 2 out of 10. Like watching a slow train wreck of Ford's life. The end is ironic.

merchant ivory film for guys

tt0443680

more or less never seen a movie with so many manly men at the verge of emotional breakdown!and you know what - the film was great.there are movies that illustrate a story - those you might remember the story if the story is good but the movie easily forgettable.there are movies that express a story - you're emotionally effected - those you remember better - you might not like the story but the film has memorable moments that you play in your head over and over.and then - there are movies that are just what the story and emotion is. they don't try to illustrate a story or express an emotion - the movie itself is the story and emotion... i don't know if i'm explaining this right.this movie comes close to being this.the characters and story - the emotions - truly amazing.and Casey affleck was amazing - deserves an Oscar for BEST LEAD ACTOR.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-289

ur0857612

title: merchant ivory film for guys review: more or less never seen a movie with so many manly men at the verge of emotional breakdown!and you know what - the film was great.there are movies that illustrate a story - those you might remember the story if the story is good but the movie easily forgettable.there are movies that express a story - you're emotionally effected - those you remember better - you might not like the story but the film has memorable moments that you play in your head over and over.and then - there are movies that are just what the story and emotion is. they don't try to illustrate a story or express an emotion - the movie itself is the story and emotion... i don't know if i'm explaining this right.this movie comes close to being this.the characters and story - the emotions - truly amazing.and Casey affleck was amazing - deserves an Oscar for BEST LEAD ACTOR.

Collecting Dust

tt0443680

A Picturesque, Slowly-Paced, Art Western with a 160 Minute Running Time may be Your Thing but After Sitting on the Shelf for Two Years, Someone Took Notice and Said, "Doesn't that picture look dusty." Surely it did, not only because it just lied there but maybe because it was Shelved because the Movie just lies there. It lies there begging you to Watch, Slowing Down so You can't Miss It. Smearing the Edges so it Looks Old and with a Malick like Voice Over that is Embarrassing, it also Mimics Malick in other ways.It is a Haunting Film with a Number of Set Pieces that Draw You in and are Nicely New in Presentation and Tone. But it can be Meditative and Contemplative to the Point of Tedium and Boredom and Much Happens that is Meaningless.Casey Affleck again Mumbles and Smirks His way through all of this and since He is a Title Character there is quite a bit of Mumbling and Smirking. Brad Pitt is Stern and Determined to Keep His Band of Misfits from Ambushing Him or Collecting the Reward Until the End when Jesse just seems to Give In to it all. There are some Rewards for those who Stick with This Doting Display of Hero Worship (or today called Celebrity), but those Moviegoers of Today (especially Western Fans) may be Tuned just a Little too Fine for this Type of Slow-Go.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-419

ur33374263

title: Collecting Dust review: A Picturesque, Slowly-Paced, Art Western with a 160 Minute Running Time may be Your Thing but After Sitting on the Shelf for Two Years, Someone Took Notice and Said, "Doesn't that picture look dusty." Surely it did, not only because it just lied there but maybe because it was Shelved because the Movie just lies there. It lies there begging you to Watch, Slowing Down so You can't Miss It. Smearing the Edges so it Looks Old and with a Malick like Voice Over that is Embarrassing, it also Mimics Malick in other ways.It is a Haunting Film with a Number of Set Pieces that Draw You in and are Nicely New in Presentation and Tone. But it can be Meditative and Contemplative to the Point of Tedium and Boredom and Much Happens that is Meaningless.Casey Affleck again Mumbles and Smirks His way through all of this and since He is a Title Character there is quite a bit of Mumbling and Smirking. Brad Pitt is Stern and Determined to Keep His Band of Misfits from Ambushing Him or Collecting the Reward Until the End when Jesse just seems to Give In to it all. There are some Rewards for those who Stick with This Doting Display of Hero Worship (or today called Celebrity), but those Moviegoers of Today (especially Western Fans) may be Tuned just a Little too Fine for this Type of Slow-Go.

Time capsule (or closet) from a bygone age

tt0443680

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is a slow-moving western. This in itself is unusual – westerns tend to be action pieces. The denouement is given away in the title, so there is no waiting to see how it will end. Instead, we are invited to spend over two and half hours examining the whys and wherefores. These are fairly involved but not inscrutable: Jesse James is hero-worshipped (almost homoerotically) by the rather limp wristed Robert Ford. Robbie joins the big man's band of bad guys, eventually gets fed up, and ends up shooting him in the back. End of story.It is one of those films billed as 'a psychological study'. Indeed, apart from some very nice photography, there is little else to study. Fortunately, Casey Affleck is up to the job and managed to make me squirm with every softly-delivered phrase. Jesse (Brad Pitt), on the other hand is macho, tough and straight (at least as low-down dirty, thievin', murderin' crooks go). And Jesse is brave. Robbie isn't. But Robbie would like the fame and adulation that goes with being brave.It is films like this that make Warhol's Lonesome Cowboys so hilarious. What do men, with strong sexual urges, no women, and cooped up with each other for hours and months in the wild west, do? Well, they discover their inner gay and have sex. Simple. So write a love story where sex just isn't gonna happen and you get enough psychoses to spin a nice yarn, some highly dysfunctional lives (it's based on a true story), or nearly three hours in the cinema.Pitt calls the film an 'anatomy of an assassination.' On that level, it is quite effective and recalls many a film noir where we have to work out why the victim was really killed. It's also a good example of how a common criminal can get to be portrayed as a dashing rogue – a persona many murderers, from serial killers to perpetrators of high-school massacres, possibly buy into. If this is a plus point of the film, the documentary-like way it is shot adds much. Great effort has gone into making even small details as authentic as possible and we genuinely feel as if we are glimpsing through a window into history. But I suspect that not everyone will have the patience to sit at this particular window that long.I have been at pains to point out that there is much to admire in this movie. Great acting, wonderful cinematography, and an eye for realism. But frankly, I'm pleased he shot him. Another hour and I would want to shoot them both.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-147

ur0064493

title: Time capsule (or closet) from a bygone age review: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is a slow-moving western. This in itself is unusual – westerns tend to be action pieces. The denouement is given away in the title, so there is no waiting to see how it will end. Instead, we are invited to spend over two and half hours examining the whys and wherefores. These are fairly involved but not inscrutable: Jesse James is hero-worshipped (almost homoerotically) by the rather limp wristed Robert Ford. Robbie joins the big man's band of bad guys, eventually gets fed up, and ends up shooting him in the back. End of story.It is one of those films billed as 'a psychological study'. Indeed, apart from some very nice photography, there is little else to study. Fortunately, Casey Affleck is up to the job and managed to make me squirm with every softly-delivered phrase. Jesse (Brad Pitt), on the other hand is macho, tough and straight (at least as low-down dirty, thievin', murderin' crooks go). And Jesse is brave. Robbie isn't. But Robbie would like the fame and adulation that goes with being brave.It is films like this that make Warhol's Lonesome Cowboys so hilarious. What do men, with strong sexual urges, no women, and cooped up with each other for hours and months in the wild west, do? Well, they discover their inner gay and have sex. Simple. So write a love story where sex just isn't gonna happen and you get enough psychoses to spin a nice yarn, some highly dysfunctional lives (it's based on a true story), or nearly three hours in the cinema.Pitt calls the film an 'anatomy of an assassination.' On that level, it is quite effective and recalls many a film noir where we have to work out why the victim was really killed. It's also a good example of how a common criminal can get to be portrayed as a dashing rogue – a persona many murderers, from serial killers to perpetrators of high-school massacres, possibly buy into. If this is a plus point of the film, the documentary-like way it is shot adds much. Great effort has gone into making even small details as authentic as possible and we genuinely feel as if we are glimpsing through a window into history. But I suspect that not everyone will have the patience to sit at this particular window that long.I have been at pains to point out that there is much to admire in this movie. Great acting, wonderful cinematography, and an eye for realism. But frankly, I'm pleased he shot him. Another hour and I would want to shoot them both.

Society's Mirror - Why this film must be seen

tt0443680

This film has had what can only be called a tortured genesis. Having been in the pipeline for some time it disappeared shortly before its original release date of autumn last year. Rumours of production problems were rife and expectations fell very low. Now it has arrived, only a year late, and, in what has been a year of many good films but few standouts, this film has rode in to save the day. It is, quite simply, awesome.Andrew Dominik conjures three exquisitely detailed, well rendered and poignant portraits in this film: Jesse James, Robert Ford and a society that must be seen as not so different from our own. Brad Pitt is astonishing as James, portraying the paranoid madness of a man trapped in his own myth whose fascination with and fear of death haunts his every move. However, Pitt is matched by the brilliance of Casey Affleck's performance. Robert Ford is shown as a man obsessed with the myth of Jesse James who, through disappointment, rejection and desire, turns against the epicentre of his dreams. It is this fascinating portrayal that lies at the centre of this film.However, Dominik places this engrossing character drama against a bewildering social background. The two live in a society that has a government that allows murder when it sees fit and punishes it when it doesn't and a public that celebrates a mass-murderer and despises an assassin who shows no remorse. To delve any further in this would give away the ending which, surprisingly enough, is not the one in the title, but the questions that arise from this film are ones about society and its moral nature and the power of obsession on a personal and a mass level.If this sounds dull to you then you're in for a surprise. The film, whilst slow-paced and long, is never boring and grips you from start to finish. Much of the reason for this has already been discussed but credit must also go to the brilliant ensemble. Sam Rockwell is the standout supporting player and his performance is a career best. Then there is Roger Deakins' cinematography which is fantastic and Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' music which is extremely well used. But, ultimately, the showpieces here are the central performances, an interesting and stylish director and a pitch perfect script. This is certainly the most accomplished film I've seen for a long time. It doesn't invite comparison (though it deserves it) with Leone's "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly", but the assassination scene is not only reminiscent of Leone's final shootout scene but is every bit as good.It may be seen as arduous by some but at some point, at home or (preferably) at the cinema, you must see this film for so many reasons – the technical brilliance, the incredible performances, the experience and, above all, the questions it raises that are some of the most important of recent years.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-79

ur4309318

title: Society's Mirror - Why this film must be seen review: This film has had what can only be called a tortured genesis. Having been in the pipeline for some time it disappeared shortly before its original release date of autumn last year. Rumours of production problems were rife and expectations fell very low. Now it has arrived, only a year late, and, in what has been a year of many good films but few standouts, this film has rode in to save the day. It is, quite simply, awesome.Andrew Dominik conjures three exquisitely detailed, well rendered and poignant portraits in this film: Jesse James, Robert Ford and a society that must be seen as not so different from our own. Brad Pitt is astonishing as James, portraying the paranoid madness of a man trapped in his own myth whose fascination with and fear of death haunts his every move. However, Pitt is matched by the brilliance of Casey Affleck's performance. Robert Ford is shown as a man obsessed with the myth of Jesse James who, through disappointment, rejection and desire, turns against the epicentre of his dreams. It is this fascinating portrayal that lies at the centre of this film.However, Dominik places this engrossing character drama against a bewildering social background. The two live in a society that has a government that allows murder when it sees fit and punishes it when it doesn't and a public that celebrates a mass-murderer and despises an assassin who shows no remorse. To delve any further in this would give away the ending which, surprisingly enough, is not the one in the title, but the questions that arise from this film are ones about society and its moral nature and the power of obsession on a personal and a mass level.If this sounds dull to you then you're in for a surprise. The film, whilst slow-paced and long, is never boring and grips you from start to finish. Much of the reason for this has already been discussed but credit must also go to the brilliant ensemble. Sam Rockwell is the standout supporting player and his performance is a career best. Then there is Roger Deakins' cinematography which is fantastic and Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' music which is extremely well used. But, ultimately, the showpieces here are the central performances, an interesting and stylish director and a pitch perfect script. This is certainly the most accomplished film I've seen for a long time. It doesn't invite comparison (though it deserves it) with Leone's "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly", but the assassination scene is not only reminiscent of Leone's final shootout scene but is every bit as good.It may be seen as arduous by some but at some point, at home or (preferably) at the cinema, you must see this film for so many reasons – the technical brilliance, the incredible performances, the experience and, above all, the questions it raises that are some of the most important of recent years.

Deconstructing Jesse

tt0443680

The finest titles, think "Damage" or "Misery", are revealing and enigmatic at the same time. This one gives it all away, and in more words than I've seen on a movie poster in a long time. The title tells the story. So all the beauty would have to be in the way it unfolds in image and dialog, right? Wrong. "Jesse James" is slow for the sake of being slow. One hour into the movie, next to nothing has happened. To make things worse, Casey Affleck (Ford) equates "good acting" with "poor pronunciation", while Brad Pitt (James) stands, sits, shoots and smokes with his mouth gaping in a most unfetching fashion, no doubt a misguided attempt at developing a trademark expression. Their blathering is so winded you keep thinking the bugger might well die before the claptrap concludes. Think "Snatch" on sedatives. Only Nick Cave's signature score and Hugh Ross' quiet off-screen narration tie this thing together. And there's the small reward of Zooey Deschanel's brief appearance as Robert Ford's lover Dorothy Evans. Her three on-screen minutes outshine the entire rest of this three-hour movie. "Jesse James" is so boring and pretentious I'm beginning to think of it as Oscar material. Say it ain't so.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-54

ur12415200

title: Deconstructing Jesse review: The finest titles, think "Damage" or "Misery", are revealing and enigmatic at the same time. This one gives it all away, and in more words than I've seen on a movie poster in a long time. The title tells the story. So all the beauty would have to be in the way it unfolds in image and dialog, right? Wrong. "Jesse James" is slow for the sake of being slow. One hour into the movie, next to nothing has happened. To make things worse, Casey Affleck (Ford) equates "good acting" with "poor pronunciation", while Brad Pitt (James) stands, sits, shoots and smokes with his mouth gaping in a most unfetching fashion, no doubt a misguided attempt at developing a trademark expression. Their blathering is so winded you keep thinking the bugger might well die before the claptrap concludes. Think "Snatch" on sedatives. Only Nick Cave's signature score and Hugh Ross' quiet off-screen narration tie this thing together. And there's the small reward of Zooey Deschanel's brief appearance as Robert Ford's lover Dorothy Evans. Her three on-screen minutes outshine the entire rest of this three-hour movie. "Jesse James" is so boring and pretentious I'm beginning to think of it as Oscar material. Say it ain't so.

Serious, poetic and beautifully shot western

tt0443680

Simply put, I thought that "The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford" was a cracking piece of work. Serious, poetic and a beautifully shot western, built on excellent central performances by Brad Pitt as Jesse James and Casey Affleck as Robert Ford respectively.Brad Pitt's Jesse James is hardly an American folk hero. He is a nasty piece of work. Unstable, unpredictable, tormented and ruthless. A dominant personality. People are afraid of Jesse James and rightly so. It is one of the best performances of Pitt's career. Forget Pitt as A-lister and tabloid fodder and think about Pitt as the great character actor that he undoubtedly is.As good as Pitt is, the true revelation here is the performance of Casey Affleck. I have only ever been aware of Affleck as Ben's brother and as the comic relief in "Ocean's Eleven", "Ocean's Twelve" and "Ocean's Thirteen". There is nothing in those films that could prepare you for his work in "The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford". Just outstanding. If he does not get a Supporting Actor nod at the Oscars next month, I will be very much surprised.Casey Affleck's Robert Ford is a slightly creepy, slightly dislikeable man who is trying way too hard. He is very much a small man trying to be a big man and in the process manages to get in way over his head. His initial hero worship of Jesse James turns into something disappointing, destructive and tragic."The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford" is a great film. Quite a long film, but engrossing throughout. The hours just shot by. It is early days yet, but I think it is my film of the year so far.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-107

ur0730831

title: Serious, poetic and beautifully shot western review: Simply put, I thought that "The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford" was a cracking piece of work. Serious, poetic and a beautifully shot western, built on excellent central performances by Brad Pitt as Jesse James and Casey Affleck as Robert Ford respectively.Brad Pitt's Jesse James is hardly an American folk hero. He is a nasty piece of work. Unstable, unpredictable, tormented and ruthless. A dominant personality. People are afraid of Jesse James and rightly so. It is one of the best performances of Pitt's career. Forget Pitt as A-lister and tabloid fodder and think about Pitt as the great character actor that he undoubtedly is.As good as Pitt is, the true revelation here is the performance of Casey Affleck. I have only ever been aware of Affleck as Ben's brother and as the comic relief in "Ocean's Eleven", "Ocean's Twelve" and "Ocean's Thirteen". There is nothing in those films that could prepare you for his work in "The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford". Just outstanding. If he does not get a Supporting Actor nod at the Oscars next month, I will be very much surprised.Casey Affleck's Robert Ford is a slightly creepy, slightly dislikeable man who is trying way too hard. He is very much a small man trying to be a big man and in the process manages to get in way over his head. His initial hero worship of Jesse James turns into something disappointing, destructive and tragic."The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford" is a great film. Quite a long film, but engrossing throughout. The hours just shot by. It is early days yet, but I think it is my film of the year so far.

Captures all the mood and atmosphere of the good western, but not always engaging

tt0443680

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning In the early days of motion pictures, the western was at the pinnacle of it's game, being the landmark of American cinema and capturing the idyllic image of the 'cowboy' as the fearless hero with a no nonsense attitude and a grizzled image, giving the world the first 'big screen hero' in the shape of John Wayne...and this would last through out the years as those like Lee Marvin and Clint Eastwood would take over the template and keep the legend alive. Nowadays, it's a rarity...although films like the re-make of 3:10 to Yuma and Ed Harris's Appaloosa do come by, in modern times it's a defining genre of cinema that's pretty much been allowed to fall by the wayside. Andrew Dominik's mouthful of a title is an attempt to revive this type of film is a lengthy, ambitious and fairly heavy piece that has all the right ingredients at hand in terms of mood, atmosphere and slow, lingering tension that somehow fixate our eyes on the main characters...but fails to really craft a truly absorbing or coherent story that is a problem when it's demanding your attention for so long.As deep and as dim as it is, it's trying to engage you more in the characters than the plot, and so it befalls the performers to bring the show to life. In the lead role as the main titular character, Brad Pitt has the job of bringing the fire and madness inside James's soul to life, as he displays signs of losing control and going completely over the edge, yet still manages to remain the most elusive outlaw in the United States. As the second titular character, as the young pretender Ford, Casey Affleck shows early signs of promise before his break through role in brother Ben's Gone Baby Gone, as the hopelessly infatuated young man who can't spin a line to any of James's associates and can never prove himself as a true man. Both are well cast, and are complimented by quite a supporting cast including Sam Rockwell, Sam Shepard, Jeremy Renner and female players in the shape of Mary Louise Parker and Brooklyn Proulx.It's a film that opened to great critical acclaim but limited box office success...the reason may be it had all the right elements in place, but couldn't use them in the right way to engage it's audience. In a day and age when this genre has far less gravitas, this is a deadly mistake to make. ***

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-335

ur0345596

title: Captures all the mood and atmosphere of the good western, but not always engaging review: STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning In the early days of motion pictures, the western was at the pinnacle of it's game, being the landmark of American cinema and capturing the idyllic image of the 'cowboy' as the fearless hero with a no nonsense attitude and a grizzled image, giving the world the first 'big screen hero' in the shape of John Wayne...and this would last through out the years as those like Lee Marvin and Clint Eastwood would take over the template and keep the legend alive. Nowadays, it's a rarity...although films like the re-make of 3:10 to Yuma and Ed Harris's Appaloosa do come by, in modern times it's a defining genre of cinema that's pretty much been allowed to fall by the wayside. Andrew Dominik's mouthful of a title is an attempt to revive this type of film is a lengthy, ambitious and fairly heavy piece that has all the right ingredients at hand in terms of mood, atmosphere and slow, lingering tension that somehow fixate our eyes on the main characters...but fails to really craft a truly absorbing or coherent story that is a problem when it's demanding your attention for so long.As deep and as dim as it is, it's trying to engage you more in the characters than the plot, and so it befalls the performers to bring the show to life. In the lead role as the main titular character, Brad Pitt has the job of bringing the fire and madness inside James's soul to life, as he displays signs of losing control and going completely over the edge, yet still manages to remain the most elusive outlaw in the United States. As the second titular character, as the young pretender Ford, Casey Affleck shows early signs of promise before his break through role in brother Ben's Gone Baby Gone, as the hopelessly infatuated young man who can't spin a line to any of James's associates and can never prove himself as a true man. Both are well cast, and are complimented by quite a supporting cast including Sam Rockwell, Sam Shepard, Jeremy Renner and female players in the shape of Mary Louise Parker and Brooklyn Proulx.It's a film that opened to great critical acclaim but limited box office success...the reason may be it had all the right elements in place, but couldn't use them in the right way to engage it's audience. In a day and age when this genre has far less gravitas, this is a deadly mistake to make. ***

"Good Nightmare Re-invention!"

tt0111686

Robert Englund, Heather Langenkamp, Wes Craven, John Saxon and Miko Hughes star in Wes Craven's 1994 horror sequel. This entry takes place 10 years after "A Nightmare on Elm Street" in L.A. focusing on actress, Heather Langenkamp who plays herself and her young son, Dylan (Hughes). After mysterious earthquakes occur, Heather notices Dylan is acting strange and learns he's being terrorized by Freddy Krueger (Englund). Heather also begins having nightmares and soon, she visits Wes who tells her that Freddy is a demonic force from the films that wants to come into reality. He convinces her that the only way to stop him is to make another film where she must play her character, Nancy Thompson one last time. Englund & Saxon also play themselves. This is a good sequel, I like Freddy's new look and J. Peter Robinson's score is great. Wes re-invented the series with this by making Freddy scary again and bringing back the original stars. I recommend this.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-287

ur6918917

title: "Good Nightmare Re-invention!" review: Robert Englund, Heather Langenkamp, Wes Craven, John Saxon and Miko Hughes star in Wes Craven's 1994 horror sequel. This entry takes place 10 years after "A Nightmare on Elm Street" in L.A. focusing on actress, Heather Langenkamp who plays herself and her young son, Dylan (Hughes). After mysterious earthquakes occur, Heather notices Dylan is acting strange and learns he's being terrorized by Freddy Krueger (Englund). Heather also begins having nightmares and soon, she visits Wes who tells her that Freddy is a demonic force from the films that wants to come into reality. He convinces her that the only way to stop him is to make another film where she must play her character, Nancy Thompson one last time. Englund & Saxon also play themselves. This is a good sequel, I like Freddy's new look and J. Peter Robinson's score is great. Wes re-invented the series with this by making Freddy scary again and bringing back the original stars. I recommend this.

A Worthy Film

tt0111686

This is an interesting movie. I like the idea that the Freddy movies were like a cover-up for an evil entity like Freddy. It is cool that they brought back tons of actors from the other movies to play themselves. This movie has good special effects and it was a fun movie to watch.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-100

ur0108019

title: A Worthy Film review: This is an interesting movie. I like the idea that the Freddy movies were like a cover-up for an evil entity like Freddy. It is cool that they brought back tons of actors from the other movies to play themselves. This movie has good special effects and it was a fun movie to watch.

One of Craven's best work as a filmmaker.

tt0111686

When the star of the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" film, Heather Langenkamp is happily married to a special make-up effects man (David Newson) and their eight year old son (Miko Hughes). Actress Langenkamp gets a chance of a life-time to appear in a role that make her famous for horror fans everywhere to make a more realistic, intelligent, adult and scary different sequel to the Elm Street saga that made Freddy Krueger (Which is been always played by Robert Englund). Which is a household name for the then-independent studio "New Line Cinema". Which filmmaker:Wes Craven is actually writing the new script but in someways Freddy has become real in the dream world. Now Freddy is stalking his victims through their dreams, for those who are involved in this new production before Craven finish his script.Written and Directed by Wes Craven (The People Under the Stairs, The Serpent and the Rainbow, Shocker) made an excellent one of a kind sequel for those, who grown up watching the original. Langenkamp is actually very good in this film and Hughes as her son almost steals the film. This could have been great also, if this was about Robert Englund's dark side to Freddy. Still, Craven did some of his best work as a filmmaker (Which he received some of the best reviews of his career of this film).DVD has an sharp anamorphic widescreen (1.85:1) transfer (also in Pan & Scan) and an strong-Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD has an fascinating audio commentary by the director, original theatrical trailer, cast & crew information and jump to a nightmare opinion. On the "Elm Street" box set on the eighth disc. DVD has an interview with the filmmaker. Some of the amusing highlights of the film is people were involved with the series-including Co-Ceo & Co-Chairman:Robert Shaye and actor:John Saxon played themselves in cameos. Englund gives an different kind of performance as the new and improve "Freddy Krueger". The film didn't have much success at the box office. But the film went on to have an cult success on video. This film is unique and doesn't really follow the Elm Street sequels. Some will find this confusing (Since in this film "Elm Street" movies were only a movie to this film) but this is a complex, well made thriller. (****/*****).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-197

ur5115203

title: One of Craven's best work as a filmmaker. review: When the star of the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" film, Heather Langenkamp is happily married to a special make-up effects man (David Newson) and their eight year old son (Miko Hughes). Actress Langenkamp gets a chance of a life-time to appear in a role that make her famous for horror fans everywhere to make a more realistic, intelligent, adult and scary different sequel to the Elm Street saga that made Freddy Krueger (Which is been always played by Robert Englund). Which is a household name for the then-independent studio "New Line Cinema". Which filmmaker:Wes Craven is actually writing the new script but in someways Freddy has become real in the dream world. Now Freddy is stalking his victims through their dreams, for those who are involved in this new production before Craven finish his script.Written and Directed by Wes Craven (The People Under the Stairs, The Serpent and the Rainbow, Shocker) made an excellent one of a kind sequel for those, who grown up watching the original. Langenkamp is actually very good in this film and Hughes as her son almost steals the film. This could have been great also, if this was about Robert Englund's dark side to Freddy. Still, Craven did some of his best work as a filmmaker (Which he received some of the best reviews of his career of this film).DVD has an sharp anamorphic widescreen (1.85:1) transfer (also in Pan & Scan) and an strong-Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD has an fascinating audio commentary by the director, original theatrical trailer, cast & crew information and jump to a nightmare opinion. On the "Elm Street" box set on the eighth disc. DVD has an interview with the filmmaker. Some of the amusing highlights of the film is people were involved with the series-including Co-Ceo & Co-Chairman:Robert Shaye and actor:John Saxon played themselves in cameos. Englund gives an different kind of performance as the new and improve "Freddy Krueger". The film didn't have much success at the box office. But the film went on to have an cult success on video. This film is unique and doesn't really follow the Elm Street sequels. Some will find this confusing (Since in this film "Elm Street" movies were only a movie to this film) but this is a complex, well made thriller. (****/*****).

My goodness, this wasn't as good as I expected.

tt0111686

Heather Langenkamp, Miko Hughes, Robert Englund, Wes Craven, John Saxon, Nick Corri, Tracey Middendorf and Robert Shaye.This movie is a movie in a movie. Actress Heather Langenkamp, who played Nanci in the first and third film is having a reccurring dream that Freddy might become real. She plays herself, and knows Robert Englund, but is still thinking Fred might come to life. It gets really stupid when Fred's prop glove actually comes to life and the glove kills people. I expected better.my review-2/4 stars.98 minutes.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-189

ur4195782

title: My goodness, this wasn't as good as I expected. review: Heather Langenkamp, Miko Hughes, Robert Englund, Wes Craven, John Saxon, Nick Corri, Tracey Middendorf and Robert Shaye.This movie is a movie in a movie. Actress Heather Langenkamp, who played Nanci in the first and third film is having a reccurring dream that Freddy might become real. She plays herself, and knows Robert Englund, but is still thinking Fred might come to life. It gets really stupid when Fred's prop glove actually comes to life and the glove kills people. I expected better.my review-2/4 stars.98 minutes.

The best reason for a sequel so far

tt0111686

One of my biggest pet peeves (besides that phrase) is when sequels come out and do nothing but plod through the same crappy plots as their predecessors or simply cash in on the success of an earlier film. Wes Craven's New Nightmare is a complete overhaul of the Nightmare on Elm Street formula, transferring it from the fictional Elm Street and into the real world. It would seem like a cheesy premise, Freddy is such a bad guy that he's even coming to life on the movie sets, but the idea makes it work.Wes Craven has been having nightmares again, and since his nightmares tend to be where he gets his best ideas (much like many other horror writers, directors, etc, not the least of which is Stephen King), he decides that this must mean it's time to make another Elm Street movie. Heather Langenkamp, who played the terrorized Nancy Thompson in Nightmares 1 and 3, takes on the role of herself. She's now 30 years old and has a child, but is gradually coming to realize that the strange things that have been happening and nightmares of Freddy that she has been having are way too similar to what happened in her movies, and she gradually comes to realize that it's all real. Some of the best moments are when she goes to talk to Wes Craven about it, to tell her what has been happening, and it is all stuff that he has already written into his new but unfinished script.Craven explains that the evil inside Freddy Kruger is actually an ancient evil that has merely been temporarily trapped inside the character of Freddy and the stories of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies, that as long as the story is kept active, the evil can be contained. Now that the movies have ended, he explains, the evil force within Freddy has been set free. There's a great scene where he tells Heather that the reason the story has died is because that's what happens when people water it down to make it an easier sell. This is a strikingly insightful comment to be made within a horror film, but it strikes me as strange since it's so obvious that he's referring to the load of bad sequels in the Nightmare on Elm Street series, only two of which he directed (the original and this one) but almost all of which he either produced or wrote. So anyway, Freddy has managed to separate himself from both Robert Englund, the actor that played him in the movies, and the Nightmare movies as well, and have entered our world. This is a hell of a lot better than Freddy Takes Manhattan!The movie takes place in an interesting parallel reality, it's not the reality in the movies and it's not the real world, but somewhere in between. All of the actors from the movies all play themselves and there is much talk of 'our world' and 'the real world,' but only the actors from previous movies play themselves, all the other people in the movie are characters played by actors, not the least of which is Heather's son, Dylan, who turns out to be the most powerful person in the movie. Dylan starts having nightmares and reacts as any kid his age would, not wanting to go to sleep and wanting mom to spend the night with him. Why she refuses for most of the movie is never really explains. She of all people must understand what he's going through!Ultimately, Freddy is able to come through and kill people when Dylan sleeps, and it seems that Freddy capitalizes on this, using the kid both as leverage and as a means to get into his world. There is a scene where Dylan runs across a freeway at night during heavy traffic, and Freddy appears in the sky and lifts him up, helping him across the freeway unharmed. This leaves the question of whether Freddy did this to protect his path into this world or just to taunt his mother, Heather, who is following closely behind and ready to run into traffic herself to save her son.(spoilers) There is also an homage scene involving Dylan's surprisingly dedicated babysitter in the hospital, she tries to prevent the nurses from putting him to sleep and ends up in a scene reminiscent of a classic scene from the first film. One of my favorite parts of the movie is how the actors near the end of the film relapse back into their roles, doing things like dressing as their characters and calling Heather Nancy and things like that, further blurring the line between the fiction from the previous films, our reality, and the reality presented in the movie. This is great stuff, but the movie really starts to slip near the end.Needless to say, there is a climactic scene in a horrific dungeon setting, with Heather and Dylan trying to escape and kill Freddy at the same time. Freddy gets his tongue forked, an interesting scene at a time when tongue piercings were simply the cool things to have, but then what? Freddy gets killed by fire? That's it?? Has Wes Craven ever seen a horror movie? Fire never kills the slashers! And to make matters worse, after Heather and Dylan finally 'kill' Freddy, we fast forward a bit and they're at home and Heather gets a copy of the script from Craven, and what does she do? She picks it up and starts reading it to Dylan! Is she MAD??? I think that New Nightmare stands as one of the best of the entire series, along with the original film, and despite these weak shortcomings, it is a tremendously well-made horror movie. It's thought out where most horror films aren't, it has a premise that's fascinating in the same way that things like time travel are fascinating, and it will surely please Nightmare fans eager to get a look at the Nightmare on Elm Street sets as well as the cavernous mansion that Craven has managed to afford from being royalty in the horror movie production world. I definitely recommend this one.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-173

ur0562732

title: The best reason for a sequel so far review: One of my biggest pet peeves (besides that phrase) is when sequels come out and do nothing but plod through the same crappy plots as their predecessors or simply cash in on the success of an earlier film. Wes Craven's New Nightmare is a complete overhaul of the Nightmare on Elm Street formula, transferring it from the fictional Elm Street and into the real world. It would seem like a cheesy premise, Freddy is such a bad guy that he's even coming to life on the movie sets, but the idea makes it work.Wes Craven has been having nightmares again, and since his nightmares tend to be where he gets his best ideas (much like many other horror writers, directors, etc, not the least of which is Stephen King), he decides that this must mean it's time to make another Elm Street movie. Heather Langenkamp, who played the terrorized Nancy Thompson in Nightmares 1 and 3, takes on the role of herself. She's now 30 years old and has a child, but is gradually coming to realize that the strange things that have been happening and nightmares of Freddy that she has been having are way too similar to what happened in her movies, and she gradually comes to realize that it's all real. Some of the best moments are when she goes to talk to Wes Craven about it, to tell her what has been happening, and it is all stuff that he has already written into his new but unfinished script.Craven explains that the evil inside Freddy Kruger is actually an ancient evil that has merely been temporarily trapped inside the character of Freddy and the stories of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies, that as long as the story is kept active, the evil can be contained. Now that the movies have ended, he explains, the evil force within Freddy has been set free. There's a great scene where he tells Heather that the reason the story has died is because that's what happens when people water it down to make it an easier sell. This is a strikingly insightful comment to be made within a horror film, but it strikes me as strange since it's so obvious that he's referring to the load of bad sequels in the Nightmare on Elm Street series, only two of which he directed (the original and this one) but almost all of which he either produced or wrote. So anyway, Freddy has managed to separate himself from both Robert Englund, the actor that played him in the movies, and the Nightmare movies as well, and have entered our world. This is a hell of a lot better than Freddy Takes Manhattan!The movie takes place in an interesting parallel reality, it's not the reality in the movies and it's not the real world, but somewhere in between. All of the actors from the movies all play themselves and there is much talk of 'our world' and 'the real world,' but only the actors from previous movies play themselves, all the other people in the movie are characters played by actors, not the least of which is Heather's son, Dylan, who turns out to be the most powerful person in the movie. Dylan starts having nightmares and reacts as any kid his age would, not wanting to go to sleep and wanting mom to spend the night with him. Why she refuses for most of the movie is never really explains. She of all people must understand what he's going through!Ultimately, Freddy is able to come through and kill people when Dylan sleeps, and it seems that Freddy capitalizes on this, using the kid both as leverage and as a means to get into his world. There is a scene where Dylan runs across a freeway at night during heavy traffic, and Freddy appears in the sky and lifts him up, helping him across the freeway unharmed. This leaves the question of whether Freddy did this to protect his path into this world or just to taunt his mother, Heather, who is following closely behind and ready to run into traffic herself to save her son.(spoilers) There is also an homage scene involving Dylan's surprisingly dedicated babysitter in the hospital, she tries to prevent the nurses from putting him to sleep and ends up in a scene reminiscent of a classic scene from the first film. One of my favorite parts of the movie is how the actors near the end of the film relapse back into their roles, doing things like dressing as their characters and calling Heather Nancy and things like that, further blurring the line between the fiction from the previous films, our reality, and the reality presented in the movie. This is great stuff, but the movie really starts to slip near the end.Needless to say, there is a climactic scene in a horrific dungeon setting, with Heather and Dylan trying to escape and kill Freddy at the same time. Freddy gets his tongue forked, an interesting scene at a time when tongue piercings were simply the cool things to have, but then what? Freddy gets killed by fire? That's it?? Has Wes Craven ever seen a horror movie? Fire never kills the slashers! And to make matters worse, after Heather and Dylan finally 'kill' Freddy, we fast forward a bit and they're at home and Heather gets a copy of the script from Craven, and what does she do? She picks it up and starts reading it to Dylan! Is she MAD??? I think that New Nightmare stands as one of the best of the entire series, along with the original film, and despite these weak shortcomings, it is a tremendously well-made horror movie. It's thought out where most horror films aren't, it has a premise that's fascinating in the same way that things like time travel are fascinating, and it will surely please Nightmare fans eager to get a look at the Nightmare on Elm Street sets as well as the cavernous mansion that Craven has managed to afford from being royalty in the horror movie production world. I definitely recommend this one.

The concluding episode to the opening master

tt0111686

It's not enough to bring Freddy Krueger back to life one more time after his official death. But Wes Craven has to come back too with the original characters, Nancy and her stubborn cop of a father. But we cannot really revive characters in a film so many years after their first appearance. So Wes Craven pushes what he calls « only make believe » one iota further and farther. Freddy was only a disguise for a real bad spirit in the world (Anne Rice has done that with her vampires and the Queen of the Damned, or Stephen King has also used this formula with his Dark Man in quite a few novels, like The Stand, and short stories) and this really bad spirit has decided to come back to the real world once and for all and under his own identity if possible, or under that of Freddy Krueger if the minds of people are obsessed by his existence. This evil spirit is of course the devil himself and it will be revealed in the very last scene. So the actors are playing their real parts and Freddy is invading their real world. It is then « make believe power two ». And it is all the more efficacious and effective because the actors are themselves and no fake identities. Wes Craven brings along his particularly caustic mind and spirit and really gets the mickey out of medical authorities, doctors, women and blacks alike, and all the fake myth about the protection of kids first and for all against their own parents. Wes Craven definitely seems to accuse society to be the real culprit, the real cause of all problems with kids, and grown-ups too. This society that classifies everyone in one little box and that can put a six year old boy in the schizophrenia box without realizing that it is going to make him schizophrenic. The classification creates the items that are classified in it. Any taxonomy is our own creation, our own delusion and we must get rid of all these taxonomies to maybe recapture some sanity and balance. But since Wes Craven is back do not be surprised if you recognize some tricks like the crazy phone calls borrowed from Scream and so many other films (it always works anyway). That's part of the game. Wes Craven borrows from everyone, himself included, and just shakes the cocktail differently and changes dressings. The sauce always becomes slightly more piquant when it is served a second time by our waiter Wes Craven. He even visualizes the first destruction of Freddy, the lynching of this child molester who attacks males first to kill them, and women second to enjoy their slow suffering and their yelling. So Freddy Krueger is roasted to death a second time, and it is when his face becomes the horny – ah ah funny ! – head of the devil. Can we hope the saga is really finished now ? Probably not. There must be some forgotten sequel somewhere, though seven is a magical number and the point has been made that it is not movies that make children epileptic but all the Freddy Kruegers, Tommyknockers, Candymen, and other boogy woogy bogeymen overfed on beetle juice instead of milk, kept in the cupboards of our minds.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University of Paris Dauphine & University of Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-217

ur3836774

title: The concluding episode to the opening master review: It's not enough to bring Freddy Krueger back to life one more time after his official death. But Wes Craven has to come back too with the original characters, Nancy and her stubborn cop of a father. But we cannot really revive characters in a film so many years after their first appearance. So Wes Craven pushes what he calls « only make believe » one iota further and farther. Freddy was only a disguise for a real bad spirit in the world (Anne Rice has done that with her vampires and the Queen of the Damned, or Stephen King has also used this formula with his Dark Man in quite a few novels, like The Stand, and short stories) and this really bad spirit has decided to come back to the real world once and for all and under his own identity if possible, or under that of Freddy Krueger if the minds of people are obsessed by his existence. This evil spirit is of course the devil himself and it will be revealed in the very last scene. So the actors are playing their real parts and Freddy is invading their real world. It is then « make believe power two ». And it is all the more efficacious and effective because the actors are themselves and no fake identities. Wes Craven brings along his particularly caustic mind and spirit and really gets the mickey out of medical authorities, doctors, women and blacks alike, and all the fake myth about the protection of kids first and for all against their own parents. Wes Craven definitely seems to accuse society to be the real culprit, the real cause of all problems with kids, and grown-ups too. This society that classifies everyone in one little box and that can put a six year old boy in the schizophrenia box without realizing that it is going to make him schizophrenic. The classification creates the items that are classified in it. Any taxonomy is our own creation, our own delusion and we must get rid of all these taxonomies to maybe recapture some sanity and balance. But since Wes Craven is back do not be surprised if you recognize some tricks like the crazy phone calls borrowed from Scream and so many other films (it always works anyway). That's part of the game. Wes Craven borrows from everyone, himself included, and just shakes the cocktail differently and changes dressings. The sauce always becomes slightly more piquant when it is served a second time by our waiter Wes Craven. He even visualizes the first destruction of Freddy, the lynching of this child molester who attacks males first to kill them, and women second to enjoy their slow suffering and their yelling. So Freddy Krueger is roasted to death a second time, and it is when his face becomes the horny – ah ah funny ! – head of the devil. Can we hope the saga is really finished now ? Probably not. There must be some forgotten sequel somewhere, though seven is a magical number and the point has been made that it is not movies that make children epileptic but all the Freddy Kruegers, Tommyknockers, Candymen, and other boogy woogy bogeymen overfed on beetle juice instead of milk, kept in the cupboards of our minds.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University of Paris Dauphine & University of Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne

The series should have stopped at Freddy's dead.

tt0111686

I have finished watching all of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies and they were a pretty good series. I wish it had finished on Freddys Dead. The last installment is the worse one. This film was completely useless. The only reason it gets 2/10 is because it creeped me out a few times and i loved seeing appearances from people from the other installments.I hated the death scenes. There was only a few. The acting as always was OK except for Robert Englund who is always great. I hated this more then Freddys revenge. Here's the final order: 1. A Nightmare on Elm Street. (8/10) 2. Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare. (7/10) 3. A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master. (7/10) 4. A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: The Dream Warriors. (7/10) 5. A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child. (6/10) 6. A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge. (3/10) 7. Wes Craven's New Nightmare. (2/10)I don't recommend. There is no reason for anyone to watch this. Stop at Freddy's Dead. 2/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-243

ur13125317

title: The series should have stopped at Freddy's dead. review: I have finished watching all of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies and they were a pretty good series. I wish it had finished on Freddys Dead. The last installment is the worse one. This film was completely useless. The only reason it gets 2/10 is because it creeped me out a few times and i loved seeing appearances from people from the other installments.I hated the death scenes. There was only a few. The acting as always was OK except for Robert Englund who is always great. I hated this more then Freddys revenge. Here's the final order: 1. A Nightmare on Elm Street. (8/10) 2. Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare. (7/10) 3. A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master. (7/10) 4. A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: The Dream Warriors. (7/10) 5. A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child. (6/10) 6. A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge. (3/10) 7. Wes Craven's New Nightmare. (2/10)I don't recommend. There is no reason for anyone to watch this. Stop at Freddy's Dead. 2/10

One of the Best Horror Films of the 90s

tt0111686

Before Wes Craven scored big with Scream, he tested his post modern take on the slasher genre with New Nightmare, the sixth sequel to his own smash hit; A Nightmare on Elm Street. New Nightmare finds the stars of the original film haunted by terrifying dreams and portents signaling the evil entity known as Freddy Krueger is about to cross over from the world of film to real life and only his greatest adversary; Nancy can stop him. This is a powerful film which hinges on the relationship between Heather langenkamp's character and the child actor who plays her son. And it works because their bond is as palpable and real as the bond between Reagan McNeil and her mother in The Exorcist. The danger and terror they face is all the more involving because you care for them. New Nightmare under performed at the box office. It alienated slasher fans because it was smart and scary and ducked the conventions of that disreputable genre. Nor did it connect with serious horror fans who may have felt burned by the awful Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare film which proceeded it or who are more dismissive of the slasher genre in general. One of the best horror films of the 90s. Highly recommended.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-297

ur48169717

title: One of the Best Horror Films of the 90s review: Before Wes Craven scored big with Scream, he tested his post modern take on the slasher genre with New Nightmare, the sixth sequel to his own smash hit; A Nightmare on Elm Street. New Nightmare finds the stars of the original film haunted by terrifying dreams and portents signaling the evil entity known as Freddy Krueger is about to cross over from the world of film to real life and only his greatest adversary; Nancy can stop him. This is a powerful film which hinges on the relationship between Heather langenkamp's character and the child actor who plays her son. And it works because their bond is as palpable and real as the bond between Reagan McNeil and her mother in The Exorcist. The danger and terror they face is all the more involving because you care for them. New Nightmare under performed at the box office. It alienated slasher fans because it was smart and scary and ducked the conventions of that disreputable genre. Nor did it connect with serious horror fans who may have felt burned by the awful Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare film which proceeded it or who are more dismissive of the slasher genre in general. One of the best horror films of the 90s. Highly recommended.

Very underrated as a horror movie. A real gem.

tt0111686

This is Wes Craven as his best. He redeems his Nightmare on Elm Street creation by going back to the original Freddy Kruger ... "darker, meaner" as described by Robert Englund. Apparently, the actors and tech people of the Nightmare on Elm Street series are having Freddy nightmares--even Robert Englund. He's real, and he's trying to get out into our world. This movie will play with your mind and leave you guessing and gasping for breath. The movie does well on several levels. At the basic core is an interesting premise, and a very good script (something lacking in The People Under the Stairs). The idea of a movie concept turning on the people involved is interesting, and it opens up many questions. Pay close attention and see appearances by many of the original cast members of the original Nightmare. Also notice several scenes of the original repeated with new life and terror. Another strength was the outstanding performances. Heather Langenkamp shows depth as a concerned mother. Robert Englund and Wes Craven get to be themselves. John Saxon, usually a "B" movie actor, even gives credibility to his acting credentials as a concerned friend (or is that himself?). The best performance comes form young Miko Hughes, who plays Heather's seven-year-old son, Dylan. Another strength for the movie is that it is set in the real world. One disturbing strength is the outstanding direction which confuses the audience between nightmares and reality. It seems many people have condemned horror movies as nadir entertainment. Friday the 13th, and the Halloween Sequels really influenced the Nightmare on Elm Street Series in this fashion because it was "B" horror dealing with sexually active teenagers. Wes Craven's New Nightmare, however, ranks as serious effort that belongs with The Exorcist, Dawn of the Dead, and The Ring. Craven handles childhood fears, the mother-son relationship, and the worship of an anti-hero, Freddy Kruger. In the end, though, he is able to draw more sympathy and compassion for the heroine. He also deftly uses this script as a way to retell the tale of Hansel and Gretel. I'd rank this as one of the top three horror movies of all time. It is definitely underrated. So watch it with the lights off ... but don't ... fall ... asleep.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-230

ur10002238

title: Very underrated as a horror movie. A real gem. review: This is Wes Craven as his best. He redeems his Nightmare on Elm Street creation by going back to the original Freddy Kruger ... "darker, meaner" as described by Robert Englund. Apparently, the actors and tech people of the Nightmare on Elm Street series are having Freddy nightmares--even Robert Englund. He's real, and he's trying to get out into our world. This movie will play with your mind and leave you guessing and gasping for breath. The movie does well on several levels. At the basic core is an interesting premise, and a very good script (something lacking in The People Under the Stairs). The idea of a movie concept turning on the people involved is interesting, and it opens up many questions. Pay close attention and see appearances by many of the original cast members of the original Nightmare. Also notice several scenes of the original repeated with new life and terror. Another strength was the outstanding performances. Heather Langenkamp shows depth as a concerned mother. Robert Englund and Wes Craven get to be themselves. John Saxon, usually a "B" movie actor, even gives credibility to his acting credentials as a concerned friend (or is that himself?). The best performance comes form young Miko Hughes, who plays Heather's seven-year-old son, Dylan. Another strength for the movie is that it is set in the real world. One disturbing strength is the outstanding direction which confuses the audience between nightmares and reality. It seems many people have condemned horror movies as nadir entertainment. Friday the 13th, and the Halloween Sequels really influenced the Nightmare on Elm Street Series in this fashion because it was "B" horror dealing with sexually active teenagers. Wes Craven's New Nightmare, however, ranks as serious effort that belongs with The Exorcist, Dawn of the Dead, and The Ring. Craven handles childhood fears, the mother-son relationship, and the worship of an anti-hero, Freddy Kruger. In the end, though, he is able to draw more sympathy and compassion for the heroine. He also deftly uses this script as a way to retell the tale of Hansel and Gretel. I'd rank this as one of the top three horror movies of all time. It is definitely underrated. So watch it with the lights off ... but don't ... fall ... asleep.

New, Fresh and Great Nightmare

tt0111686

Though the nightmares continue (SEE: 2003's Freddy Vs. Jason, 2010's A Nightmare on Elm Street), Wes Craven's New Nightmare was the perfect conclusion to the older series, much like Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.Wildly original – before this movie was released, I had never seen such an original idea as this, especially in a horror series seven deep. In fact, though #4 remains my favorite of the series, this is certainly the most original since #1. You have to give Craven some kudos here; he's hit & miss, though mostly hit. And for him to return to his groundbreaking and innovative horror series for a part SEVEN, it takes balls.How's this for an idea for a movie: Let's acknowledge that there is, in fact, a horror movie called A Nightmare on Elm Street starring Heather Langenkamp, Robert Englund and John Saxon, and that script idea was based on the director/creator Wes Craven's own real nightmares. Let's put these people in a film about that film and have them play themselves. Then, let's fast forward through 5 sequels and when the series is pretty much dead (no pun on the title of #6: Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare as it wasn't just the title that did it in, it was the extremely poor quality) until...Craven begins to have nightmares once again.Apparently he needs Heather's help in finishing off the story, once again. Heather Langenkamp's comfortable in her life: she loves her husband, son and hates violence. She's shy when it comes to the fame caused by Nightmare's #1 and #3 (which is the exact opposite for actor Robert Englund, apparently.) But, things have been a little shaky lately, beyond the obvious reasons: recent earthquakes.She's been having nightmares and her child, too. Make that everyone involved in the films have. But, things are coming true, like in the films she was in. And she's getting crank Freddy calls, annoying letters and her TV will not shut off, even with the power cord unplugged. In short, she's practically falling apart. It doesn't help that her boy likes to scream his head off every 4-5 shots of the film. (Actually, that can make any viewer, like me, crazy.) Heather must attempt to solve this mystery, and quickly as not only does the body count stack up, but people start to think she's crazy for thinking Freddy is really behind all the killings.Though the movie has its flaws (already mentioned one – that kid WAS ANNOYING and there were some implausible and inconsistencies in the plot) and it wasn't perfect by any means, but I really, really liked and admired this film, even beyond being a self-described Freddy Fan.I love the people playing themselves, especially Langenkamp, Englund, Saxon, Craven and Shaye. Heather Langenkamp finally acts – as much as I liked her in #1 and #3, her acting was kind of, well, weak. Here, despite her playing herself, she's natural on screen, believable, credible and someone to root for. As was Robert Englund – it was nice seeing how friendly he is, and a real person beyond the makeup. I've always been a fan of John Saxon, and again, it's great seeing him normal and keeping up a friendship with his on-screen daughter played by Langenkamp. And though Craven and Shaye are barely in it, I still liked their performances as well. (Honorable mentions, and as a said-Freddy Fan, including looking through the funeral crowd to find some of my favorite former stars of the series, including Tuesday Knight. Yes, I'm aware Depp wasn't there, but he did want to be, so that counts.) Also, keeping up with the New Nightmare plot line, Freddy (or the entity now known as "Freddy" – watch the movie to find out why) finally gets evil. (I'm sure the 2010 remake/reboot will contain the ultimate evil Freddy, but, to date, we haven't gotten that far.) He looks darker, acts more wicked and is more restrained in his comments – and you can tell, when he does say something, it's for his own amusement, not for the audience's for once. This is good writing here. Actually, I felt the entire movie was great writing and contained great homage to Craven's original – SEE: her hair and the gory scene between the babysitter and Heather's son.I don't judge a movie based on box office receipts, but I was saddened to see this one fail so miserably. Perhaps people just gave up on Freddy after #6 was so horrible. (#5 didn't do well either at the box office, so I guess it was inevitable.) But this movie sincerely made up for #5-6, much like what Halloween: H20 (part 7) did for the terrible string of sequels leading up to the worst Halloween sequel, #6.And finally, (spoiler, as if a lot of this hasn't been so far) since it's not really Freddy, I love the fact New Line kept to their word – Freddy Krueger really did die in #6: Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare (hence the title) and Paramount did the same thing (Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter was the final as part 5 of the Jason Voorhees series was a different killer.) Of course, that argument's out the window with both Freddy Vs. Jason and Friday the 13th part VI: Jason Lives. Granted, in reality, I am only talking about Wes Craven's New Nightmare in 1994. It would be years until Freddy returned for Freddy Vs. Jason. (Wow, that was a mouthful, but hopefully I got my point across.) 1984's A Nightmare on Elm Street had a great premise and an original story. Wes Craven's New Nightmare took that five steps ahead. And that's a rarity in any genre. Highly recommended.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-259

ur17825945

title: New, Fresh and Great Nightmare review: Though the nightmares continue (SEE: 2003's Freddy Vs. Jason, 2010's A Nightmare on Elm Street), Wes Craven's New Nightmare was the perfect conclusion to the older series, much like Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.Wildly original – before this movie was released, I had never seen such an original idea as this, especially in a horror series seven deep. In fact, though #4 remains my favorite of the series, this is certainly the most original since #1. You have to give Craven some kudos here; he's hit & miss, though mostly hit. And for him to return to his groundbreaking and innovative horror series for a part SEVEN, it takes balls.How's this for an idea for a movie: Let's acknowledge that there is, in fact, a horror movie called A Nightmare on Elm Street starring Heather Langenkamp, Robert Englund and John Saxon, and that script idea was based on the director/creator Wes Craven's own real nightmares. Let's put these people in a film about that film and have them play themselves. Then, let's fast forward through 5 sequels and when the series is pretty much dead (no pun on the title of #6: Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare as it wasn't just the title that did it in, it was the extremely poor quality) until...Craven begins to have nightmares once again.Apparently he needs Heather's help in finishing off the story, once again. Heather Langenkamp's comfortable in her life: she loves her husband, son and hates violence. She's shy when it comes to the fame caused by Nightmare's #1 and #3 (which is the exact opposite for actor Robert Englund, apparently.) But, things have been a little shaky lately, beyond the obvious reasons: recent earthquakes.She's been having nightmares and her child, too. Make that everyone involved in the films have. But, things are coming true, like in the films she was in. And she's getting crank Freddy calls, annoying letters and her TV will not shut off, even with the power cord unplugged. In short, she's practically falling apart. It doesn't help that her boy likes to scream his head off every 4-5 shots of the film. (Actually, that can make any viewer, like me, crazy.) Heather must attempt to solve this mystery, and quickly as not only does the body count stack up, but people start to think she's crazy for thinking Freddy is really behind all the killings.Though the movie has its flaws (already mentioned one – that kid WAS ANNOYING and there were some implausible and inconsistencies in the plot) and it wasn't perfect by any means, but I really, really liked and admired this film, even beyond being a self-described Freddy Fan.I love the people playing themselves, especially Langenkamp, Englund, Saxon, Craven and Shaye. Heather Langenkamp finally acts – as much as I liked her in #1 and #3, her acting was kind of, well, weak. Here, despite her playing herself, she's natural on screen, believable, credible and someone to root for. As was Robert Englund – it was nice seeing how friendly he is, and a real person beyond the makeup. I've always been a fan of John Saxon, and again, it's great seeing him normal and keeping up a friendship with his on-screen daughter played by Langenkamp. And though Craven and Shaye are barely in it, I still liked their performances as well. (Honorable mentions, and as a said-Freddy Fan, including looking through the funeral crowd to find some of my favorite former stars of the series, including Tuesday Knight. Yes, I'm aware Depp wasn't there, but he did want to be, so that counts.) Also, keeping up with the New Nightmare plot line, Freddy (or the entity now known as "Freddy" – watch the movie to find out why) finally gets evil. (I'm sure the 2010 remake/reboot will contain the ultimate evil Freddy, but, to date, we haven't gotten that far.) He looks darker, acts more wicked and is more restrained in his comments – and you can tell, when he does say something, it's for his own amusement, not for the audience's for once. This is good writing here. Actually, I felt the entire movie was great writing and contained great homage to Craven's original – SEE: her hair and the gory scene between the babysitter and Heather's son.I don't judge a movie based on box office receipts, but I was saddened to see this one fail so miserably. Perhaps people just gave up on Freddy after #6 was so horrible. (#5 didn't do well either at the box office, so I guess it was inevitable.) But this movie sincerely made up for #5-6, much like what Halloween: H20 (part 7) did for the terrible string of sequels leading up to the worst Halloween sequel, #6.And finally, (spoiler, as if a lot of this hasn't been so far) since it's not really Freddy, I love the fact New Line kept to their word – Freddy Krueger really did die in #6: Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare (hence the title) and Paramount did the same thing (Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter was the final as part 5 of the Jason Voorhees series was a different killer.) Of course, that argument's out the window with both Freddy Vs. Jason and Friday the 13th part VI: Jason Lives. Granted, in reality, I am only talking about Wes Craven's New Nightmare in 1994. It would be years until Freddy returned for Freddy Vs. Jason. (Wow, that was a mouthful, but hopefully I got my point across.) 1984's A Nightmare on Elm Street had a great premise and an original story. Wes Craven's New Nightmare took that five steps ahead. And that's a rarity in any genre. Highly recommended.

Freddy gets existential

tt0111686

The "Nightmare on Elm Street" phenomenon is something that has always eluded me; sure, the original film had some moments that scared me when I was in the "under 10" age bracket, but now seem rather tame. I never bothered watching the sequels, save for random moments I'd catch on cable, so I went into Wes Craven's "New Nightmare" with few expectations, and even fewer reservations. And I was quite pleasantly surprised by the end result. Like "Halloween: H20," this is a film that all but ignores the sequels sandwiched between the original and itself, opting to bring the series to a respectable end. At the time of its release in 1994, "New Nightmare"'s concept of reality overlapping with fantasy, and a self-referential attitude (the fictional Freddy has become such a pop-culture icon that he begins to manifest in the real world) was rather radical, and would be revisited by Craven in the "Scream" trilogy. Where "New Nightmare" diverges from those films is in its cleverly existential sub-layer; Craven, a former college professor, brings a refreshing intelligence to his dream-logic, instead of using it as a cheap plot device. By "Saw" and "Hostel" standards, the film is restrained in its bloodshed, instead looking to inspire chills through a sustained unpredictability that works extremely well. Craven represents his maternal side in Heather Langenkamp's concerned mother, and gets some good, cheeky performances from John Saxon and Robert Englund (as himself and Freddy).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-214

ur1193248

title: Freddy gets existential review: The "Nightmare on Elm Street" phenomenon is something that has always eluded me; sure, the original film had some moments that scared me when I was in the "under 10" age bracket, but now seem rather tame. I never bothered watching the sequels, save for random moments I'd catch on cable, so I went into Wes Craven's "New Nightmare" with few expectations, and even fewer reservations. And I was quite pleasantly surprised by the end result. Like "Halloween: H20," this is a film that all but ignores the sequels sandwiched between the original and itself, opting to bring the series to a respectable end. At the time of its release in 1994, "New Nightmare"'s concept of reality overlapping with fantasy, and a self-referential attitude (the fictional Freddy has become such a pop-culture icon that he begins to manifest in the real world) was rather radical, and would be revisited by Craven in the "Scream" trilogy. Where "New Nightmare" diverges from those films is in its cleverly existential sub-layer; Craven, a former college professor, brings a refreshing intelligence to his dream-logic, instead of using it as a cheap plot device. By "Saw" and "Hostel" standards, the film is restrained in its bloodshed, instead looking to inspire chills through a sustained unpredictability that works extremely well. Craven represents his maternal side in Heather Langenkamp's concerned mother, and gets some good, cheeky performances from John Saxon and Robert Englund (as himself and Freddy).

Thanks to this film, Freddy's Dead feels like a bad dream (No pun intended)

tt0111686

With 'Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare' it seemed the once very profitable series was finally over. The concept of a killer haunting the dreams of teenagers was getting old and nothing much new could be done with it. After 1-3 the antagonist went from feared monster to beloved anti-hero thanks to the merchandising and one-liners spouted by him. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy every Nightmare film to varying degrees and have a lot of the merchandise, but this icon and series had been run into the ground...until 1994. Wes Craven, creator of the original film and also co-writer and executive producer of 3, had come up with a really novel idea for a movie that would not only bring back everyone's favorite Boogey Man, but also returns the series to it's roots.Pros: Great writing and directing by director Craven, who gives the movie a kind of documentary feel. Solid performances from the cast. A good and powerful score. The pace does start slow, but once it picks up it goes along nicely. Thanks to Wes Craven and Robert Englund Freddy is scary again. Good special and visual effects. A unique, for the time, premise that breathes new life into the franchise. Suspenseful and unpredictable. Some great nods and homages to the original.Cons: More Freddy would've been nice. Fans may also be disappointed by the low body count. The finale, though well done, is too big and over-the-top compared to the rest of the film.Final thoughts: Kudos to Wes Craven and his cast and crew for bringing some much needed class and dignity to the series. It may not be as good as the original, but it's a great companion piece to it. Now only if John Carpenter would do the same thing for the 'Halloween' series.My rating: 4/5

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-224

ur4597795

title: Thanks to this film, Freddy's Dead feels like a bad dream (No pun intended) review: With 'Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare' it seemed the once very profitable series was finally over. The concept of a killer haunting the dreams of teenagers was getting old and nothing much new could be done with it. After 1-3 the antagonist went from feared monster to beloved anti-hero thanks to the merchandising and one-liners spouted by him. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy every Nightmare film to varying degrees and have a lot of the merchandise, but this icon and series had been run into the ground...until 1994. Wes Craven, creator of the original film and also co-writer and executive producer of 3, had come up with a really novel idea for a movie that would not only bring back everyone's favorite Boogey Man, but also returns the series to it's roots.Pros: Great writing and directing by director Craven, who gives the movie a kind of documentary feel. Solid performances from the cast. A good and powerful score. The pace does start slow, but once it picks up it goes along nicely. Thanks to Wes Craven and Robert Englund Freddy is scary again. Good special and visual effects. A unique, for the time, premise that breathes new life into the franchise. Suspenseful and unpredictable. Some great nods and homages to the original.Cons: More Freddy would've been nice. Fans may also be disappointed by the low body count. The finale, though well done, is too big and over-the-top compared to the rest of the film.Final thoughts: Kudos to Wes Craven and his cast and crew for bringing some much needed class and dignity to the series. It may not be as good as the original, but it's a great companion piece to it. Now only if John Carpenter would do the same thing for the 'Halloween' series.My rating: 4/5

It takes a master to re-birth a tired franchise

tt0111686

None of the Nightmare On Elm Street sequels were straight-up 'bad' per se. But the series has definitely hit an all time lull with Freddy's Dead. Could anyone breath new life into it? Probably not, other than the creator and horror master himself. Wes Craven comes up with one of the coolest, most unique ideas in a horror franchise. He breaks down the fourth wall and lets Freddy Kreuger into the real real world and brings back some of the iconic original characters.Heather Langenkamp returns as herself who is contemplating returning the Nightmare series as Nancy. Its great to have her back and she brings a certain memorable class to the film. The very talented youngster Miko Hughes (he was stunning in Mercury Rising) plays Heather's young son Dylan. He does a great job! John Saxon also returns playing himself this time around and its good to see him back as he does a great job too. Even Wes Craven plays double duty as himself and it was really cool to have him on the cast. David Newsom is decent as Langenkamp's husband although his role is quite small they have good chemistry. Robert Englund is the star of this movie. That might seem like an obvious statement but he is absolutely phenomenal in New Nightmare playing himself but also the return to the dark twisted killer that is Freddy Kreuger. Englund is a talented actor who has been type casted into horror flicks but this proved he can be versatile and really work with a great script. Its also proof that it was the lack of really depthy scripts that changed Kreuger into a comedic character because he slips back into the dark version of Kreuger flawlessly. It was so much fun to see Englund and Langenkamp together out of character and playing themselves.Ultimately you could watch the first Nightmare On Elm Street movie and then watch this one and not miss anything. This is a direct follow up to Wes Craven's original film and it is a brilliant addition to the series and the perfect way to usher in the tenth anniversary at the time. Generally this is considered by fans to be a great re-birth in the series and rightfully so. This one proves why horror fans like me keep coming back for more because sometimes even upper instalments can surprise you!! 8/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-286

ur1697212

title: It takes a master to re-birth a tired franchise review: None of the Nightmare On Elm Street sequels were straight-up 'bad' per se. But the series has definitely hit an all time lull with Freddy's Dead. Could anyone breath new life into it? Probably not, other than the creator and horror master himself. Wes Craven comes up with one of the coolest, most unique ideas in a horror franchise. He breaks down the fourth wall and lets Freddy Kreuger into the real real world and brings back some of the iconic original characters.Heather Langenkamp returns as herself who is contemplating returning the Nightmare series as Nancy. Its great to have her back and she brings a certain memorable class to the film. The very talented youngster Miko Hughes (he was stunning in Mercury Rising) plays Heather's young son Dylan. He does a great job! John Saxon also returns playing himself this time around and its good to see him back as he does a great job too. Even Wes Craven plays double duty as himself and it was really cool to have him on the cast. David Newsom is decent as Langenkamp's husband although his role is quite small they have good chemistry. Robert Englund is the star of this movie. That might seem like an obvious statement but he is absolutely phenomenal in New Nightmare playing himself but also the return to the dark twisted killer that is Freddy Kreuger. Englund is a talented actor who has been type casted into horror flicks but this proved he can be versatile and really work with a great script. Its also proof that it was the lack of really depthy scripts that changed Kreuger into a comedic character because he slips back into the dark version of Kreuger flawlessly. It was so much fun to see Englund and Langenkamp together out of character and playing themselves.Ultimately you could watch the first Nightmare On Elm Street movie and then watch this one and not miss anything. This is a direct follow up to Wes Craven's original film and it is a brilliant addition to the series and the perfect way to usher in the tenth anniversary at the time. Generally this is considered by fans to be a great re-birth in the series and rightfully so. This one proves why horror fans like me keep coming back for more because sometimes even upper instalments can surprise you!! 8/10

The best "Nightmare" movie - funny, scary, clever and fresh

tt0111686

Wes Craven was most popular for creating the self-referential subgenre of horror movies with "Scream" in 1996, but it was actually two years prior - with "New Nightmare" - that he first played around with the concept. This semi-sequel to the popular "Nightmare on Elm Street" series (begun in 1984) takes place in the real world, and revolves around actress Heather Langenkamp and her fame after the success of the films.However, ten years after the original, a stalker has started to leave her menacing phone calls mimicking the voice of Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), the infamous character who - in the film series itself - is the dead pedophile who lives in children's dreams and kills them in their sleep.Freddy was killed off in the last "Nightmare" movie and now he's crossing over into the real world to seek revenge. He kills Heather's husband and begins to go after her son, Dylan (Miko Hughes), who is plagued by terrifying nightmares.Meanwhile, Robert Englund suffers similar scares and begins to have odd visions involving his character Freddy."New Nightmare" is a very clever film, but it's not perfect. In terms of scares, it is far more polished than the original - a larger budget, better makeup, and generally just more professional. The scary moments are more tense and frightening.But there are some lapses in logic. Heather's husband dies and she doesn't seem to care very much (this may have to do with the fact that she's simply a bad actress to begin with, but it also just might be a bad script). She visits the morgue and leaves her son at home in the middle of the morning - presumably without a babysitter. A bit of an odd thing to do after having obsessed about making sure he wasn't alone at any given time due to his Freddy visions.Similar inconsistencies occur throughout the film, but in my opinion, it's about on par with the original "Nightmare on Elm Street" and probably - at least from a technical perspective - the best of the bunch. I generally enjoy clever, self-referential films and that's just an added bonus here - I'd call this the most original and witty entry in the series, by far.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-194

ur1173088

title: The best "Nightmare" movie - funny, scary, clever and fresh review: Wes Craven was most popular for creating the self-referential subgenre of horror movies with "Scream" in 1996, but it was actually two years prior - with "New Nightmare" - that he first played around with the concept. This semi-sequel to the popular "Nightmare on Elm Street" series (begun in 1984) takes place in the real world, and revolves around actress Heather Langenkamp and her fame after the success of the films.However, ten years after the original, a stalker has started to leave her menacing phone calls mimicking the voice of Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), the infamous character who - in the film series itself - is the dead pedophile who lives in children's dreams and kills them in their sleep.Freddy was killed off in the last "Nightmare" movie and now he's crossing over into the real world to seek revenge. He kills Heather's husband and begins to go after her son, Dylan (Miko Hughes), who is plagued by terrifying nightmares.Meanwhile, Robert Englund suffers similar scares and begins to have odd visions involving his character Freddy."New Nightmare" is a very clever film, but it's not perfect. In terms of scares, it is far more polished than the original - a larger budget, better makeup, and generally just more professional. The scary moments are more tense and frightening.But there are some lapses in logic. Heather's husband dies and she doesn't seem to care very much (this may have to do with the fact that she's simply a bad actress to begin with, but it also just might be a bad script). She visits the morgue and leaves her son at home in the middle of the morning - presumably without a babysitter. A bit of an odd thing to do after having obsessed about making sure he wasn't alone at any given time due to his Freddy visions.Similar inconsistencies occur throughout the film, but in my opinion, it's about on par with the original "Nightmare on Elm Street" and probably - at least from a technical perspective - the best of the bunch. I generally enjoy clever, self-referential films and that's just an added bonus here - I'd call this the most original and witty entry in the series, by far.

This should have been part 2

tt0111686

I love horror movies. I love being scared and I love the fact that a movie (something make believe that I, as an intelligent person,knows is just images projected from a screen ) can manipulate my emotions and make me nervous. This is one of those movies. And in the 90's, there have only been two movies that have actually made me nervous in some scenes. And those two movies are by Craven himself---Scream and this one.When this film first came out, it was ten years and six films after the original. I have seen all the Freddy movies more out of morbid curiosity than out of interest. And maybe a part of me was hoping to catch a glimpse of what made the first so damn scary. And time and time again I was disappointed. But when I read in Fangoria magazine that this new one was going to be directed by Craven, I got very excited. Could it possibly be that this film would go back to it's roots?Yes, it did.There is no two ways about it, Craven cares about Freddy. He cares about how he was supposed to be, not what he has turned into in the last decade. Freddy was not even remotely funny in the first one. He was a brutal, maniacal, sadistic, bent on revenge murderer. He wanted to slice Nancy in two and he did that to Tina ( actually sliceher into many pieces ). But in the mindless sequels to come, he became Eddie Murphy. And there was nothing frightening about the sequels. They made money but they weren't true horror films. But this one, well this one goes back to it's roots and is almost as scary as the first one.This story is about the film character of Freddy becoming real somehow. He has been a part of Lagenkamp, Saxon, Craven and Englund's life for so long that he has somehow become real. And now what was once a simple film character actually haunts the cast of the original. We even get to see Rod ( Tina's boyfriend from the original ) at one of the funerals. And what makes the story scary is that now Freddy has decided to come after Heather's kid.This film goes back to all the techniques that made the first a classic. There is excellent direction to make us fear what is under the bed. The lighting is classic horror film lighting and the music is perfect. There is however one complaint that I have and that is when Freddy is chasing the kid across the road. He has become larger than life. He is like the Stay Puft marshmallow man from Ghostbusters. And that it seems is much more like the other Nightmares, not Craven's version. And that takes away the delight in watching what was otherwise a perfect horror film.I said in one of my reviews of a horror film that there are no films in the 90's that are truly scary. However this one is as close to an 80's horror flick as you will get now a days. It is very frightening and it is almost a prequel to Scream. This is one film that should not be missed. It is a tribute to what scary films are supposed to be. If I want to laugh I'll see Chris Rock, but if I want to be scared, Craven is the man!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-20

ur0355122

title: This should have been part 2 review: I love horror movies. I love being scared and I love the fact that a movie (something make believe that I, as an intelligent person,knows is just images projected from a screen ) can manipulate my emotions and make me nervous. This is one of those movies. And in the 90's, there have only been two movies that have actually made me nervous in some scenes. And those two movies are by Craven himself---Scream and this one.When this film first came out, it was ten years and six films after the original. I have seen all the Freddy movies more out of morbid curiosity than out of interest. And maybe a part of me was hoping to catch a glimpse of what made the first so damn scary. And time and time again I was disappointed. But when I read in Fangoria magazine that this new one was going to be directed by Craven, I got very excited. Could it possibly be that this film would go back to it's roots?Yes, it did.There is no two ways about it, Craven cares about Freddy. He cares about how he was supposed to be, not what he has turned into in the last decade. Freddy was not even remotely funny in the first one. He was a brutal, maniacal, sadistic, bent on revenge murderer. He wanted to slice Nancy in two and he did that to Tina ( actually sliceher into many pieces ). But in the mindless sequels to come, he became Eddie Murphy. And there was nothing frightening about the sequels. They made money but they weren't true horror films. But this one, well this one goes back to it's roots and is almost as scary as the first one.This story is about the film character of Freddy becoming real somehow. He has been a part of Lagenkamp, Saxon, Craven and Englund's life for so long that he has somehow become real. And now what was once a simple film character actually haunts the cast of the original. We even get to see Rod ( Tina's boyfriend from the original ) at one of the funerals. And what makes the story scary is that now Freddy has decided to come after Heather's kid.This film goes back to all the techniques that made the first a classic. There is excellent direction to make us fear what is under the bed. The lighting is classic horror film lighting and the music is perfect. There is however one complaint that I have and that is when Freddy is chasing the kid across the road. He has become larger than life. He is like the Stay Puft marshmallow man from Ghostbusters. And that it seems is much more like the other Nightmares, not Craven's version. And that takes away the delight in watching what was otherwise a perfect horror film.I said in one of my reviews of a horror film that there are no films in the 90's that are truly scary. However this one is as close to an 80's horror flick as you will get now a days. It is very frightening and it is almost a prequel to Scream. This is one film that should not be missed. It is a tribute to what scary films are supposed to be. If I want to laugh I'll see Chris Rock, but if I want to be scared, Craven is the man!

The rare case where changing ways late in the game actually works

tt0111686

Wes Craven's New Nightmare comes as the sixth sequel to the long-running Nightmare on Elm Street franchise but finds itself more functional and ambitious than many franchises that have made it this long do. Infused with a great deal of meta-writing to the point of intrigue, crafty ideas about the effects horror films have on those who make them, and darker, more terrifying portrayals of the film's beloved dream-haunter, New Nightmare revives the franchise that, according to Craven, was beginning to get too off-task with its practices.By this point, Craven had already expressed frustration over the fact that the character of Freddy Krueger had become far too comical, and the later films were written with far too much silliness, masking the true horror and fright he originally conceived for the series. Freddy had become "cartoonish" and lost his original abilities to frighten audiences as much as taunt them with silly phrases and ubiquity in pop culture. As a result, Craven created New Nightmare to give that life back to the franchise, and he did so in a way that explored a fascination with the concept of "metafilm," or a movie that is referencing beyond the film into the real lives of the actors or to some other, unrelated film universe, as if the characters are wiser beyond their own definitive world.This fascination with "metafilm" Craven began to toy with would only get further explored in his critically/financially-successful Scream franchise, which was brewed two years after New Nightmare. For now, however, Nightmare concerns itself with Heather Langenkamp, the actress who portrayed Nancy Thompson in the original Nightmare film, as she lives with her husband, who works in special effects, and young son in Los Angeles. Heather has gone onto receive a great deal of recognition for her as Nancy, and learns that Wes Craven is contemplating using her again for his forthcoming Nightmare project, which will further which will, of course, have Robert Englund reprising his role as Freddy Kruger.In the mix of this, Heather begins experiencing lucid nightmares of her or her family being attacked and assaulted by Freddy and taken as "his children," completely losing sense of reality. This is only furthered by the abundance of earthquakes Los Angeles is experiencing, as well as the constant stress she's under with managing her child and her other projects.Craven decorates New Nightmare much differently than the previous installments, most notably through the abundance of different costumes Freddy boasts, with one of the most stylish and menacing being a black and blue cloak. In addition, Englund is much less concerned with sloganeering and finding just the right punchline for his character Freddy than returning to the haunting and demonic presence Freddy can truly be. The idea of a figure haunting our dreams and finding ways of sneaking into our reality, distorting it, and leaving it at his mercy is a wickedly frightening idea, and Craven returns to the elements of exploring that idea rather than turning it into black comedy.New Nightmare can be quite eerie at times, but it also has a pleasantly subtle sense of sass to it, especially when Craven comes on-screen, or when one of Heather's costars tries to but in and help her out. This is where the Scream foundation ostensibly came into play, with Craven experimenting with self-referential humor in such a way that makes the film more interesting and not entirely consumed in its own cheeky ways. Combining these elements, especially in a way meant to evoke humor and make fans of a franchise recall moments from films past, could easily destruct in a big way, but Craven is so smooth with the incorporation of the aforementioned elements that we get the idea he had this idea festering in his mind long before he put the pen to the paper.Because evident care and thought went into Wes Craven's New Nightmare is likely why it plays like a unique horror film, quietly proposing ideas about those who work in the film industry, specifically making horror films, and what effect such work has on their psyche and their own personal lives. The tone is much more frightening, and given the seriousness and ambition Craven has for the material, the film feels much more sincere in ways the abundance of Nightmare sequels lacked, leaving this to be one of the most unlikely contenders for one of the strongest sequels to a horror film, especially trying something new this late in the game.Starring: Heather Langenkamp, Robert Englund, John Saxon, and Miko Hughes. Directed by: Wes Craven.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-299

ur23483288

title: The rare case where changing ways late in the game actually works review: Wes Craven's New Nightmare comes as the sixth sequel to the long-running Nightmare on Elm Street franchise but finds itself more functional and ambitious than many franchises that have made it this long do. Infused with a great deal of meta-writing to the point of intrigue, crafty ideas about the effects horror films have on those who make them, and darker, more terrifying portrayals of the film's beloved dream-haunter, New Nightmare revives the franchise that, according to Craven, was beginning to get too off-task with its practices.By this point, Craven had already expressed frustration over the fact that the character of Freddy Krueger had become far too comical, and the later films were written with far too much silliness, masking the true horror and fright he originally conceived for the series. Freddy had become "cartoonish" and lost his original abilities to frighten audiences as much as taunt them with silly phrases and ubiquity in pop culture. As a result, Craven created New Nightmare to give that life back to the franchise, and he did so in a way that explored a fascination with the concept of "metafilm," or a movie that is referencing beyond the film into the real lives of the actors or to some other, unrelated film universe, as if the characters are wiser beyond their own definitive world.This fascination with "metafilm" Craven began to toy with would only get further explored in his critically/financially-successful Scream franchise, which was brewed two years after New Nightmare. For now, however, Nightmare concerns itself with Heather Langenkamp, the actress who portrayed Nancy Thompson in the original Nightmare film, as she lives with her husband, who works in special effects, and young son in Los Angeles. Heather has gone onto receive a great deal of recognition for her as Nancy, and learns that Wes Craven is contemplating using her again for his forthcoming Nightmare project, which will further which will, of course, have Robert Englund reprising his role as Freddy Kruger.In the mix of this, Heather begins experiencing lucid nightmares of her or her family being attacked and assaulted by Freddy and taken as "his children," completely losing sense of reality. This is only furthered by the abundance of earthquakes Los Angeles is experiencing, as well as the constant stress she's under with managing her child and her other projects.Craven decorates New Nightmare much differently than the previous installments, most notably through the abundance of different costumes Freddy boasts, with one of the most stylish and menacing being a black and blue cloak. In addition, Englund is much less concerned with sloganeering and finding just the right punchline for his character Freddy than returning to the haunting and demonic presence Freddy can truly be. The idea of a figure haunting our dreams and finding ways of sneaking into our reality, distorting it, and leaving it at his mercy is a wickedly frightening idea, and Craven returns to the elements of exploring that idea rather than turning it into black comedy.New Nightmare can be quite eerie at times, but it also has a pleasantly subtle sense of sass to it, especially when Craven comes on-screen, or when one of Heather's costars tries to but in and help her out. This is where the Scream foundation ostensibly came into play, with Craven experimenting with self-referential humor in such a way that makes the film more interesting and not entirely consumed in its own cheeky ways. Combining these elements, especially in a way meant to evoke humor and make fans of a franchise recall moments from films past, could easily destruct in a big way, but Craven is so smooth with the incorporation of the aforementioned elements that we get the idea he had this idea festering in his mind long before he put the pen to the paper.Because evident care and thought went into Wes Craven's New Nightmare is likely why it plays like a unique horror film, quietly proposing ideas about those who work in the film industry, specifically making horror films, and what effect such work has on their psyche and their own personal lives. The tone is much more frightening, and given the seriousness and ambition Craven has for the material, the film feels much more sincere in ways the abundance of Nightmare sequels lacked, leaving this to be one of the most unlikely contenders for one of the strongest sequels to a horror film, especially trying something new this late in the game.Starring: Heather Langenkamp, Robert Englund, John Saxon, and Miko Hughes. Directed by: Wes Craven.

Forget about the 80's Krueger. This one takes the character seriously.

tt0111686

The best thing about "New Nightmare" is it's plot because it's a 180ª change in the Nightmare series. Putting Freddy Krueger on the real world was an idea that most Horror fans accepted because the genre seemed to be dead in the mid 90's.Other thing that fans of the genre and especially fans of the series praised was the inclusion of favorite characters. Nancy and her father Lt. Thompson return to put an end to Freddy for once and all. Heather L. delivers a great performance and seemed to really love her character and the series in general. John Saxon is great as always. Both characters add a nostalgic touch to the series. The rest of the cast is okay. Heather's son delivers a good performance and became quickly a favorite.Although Krueger has minimal on-screen time, it's justified by the plot and it surely works. Freddy Krueger used to be scary and menacing and in this final movie he returns to his roots. Great performance by Robert Englund.The ending is decent and is somehow a good way to end Freddy's reign of terror. He goes through the same fatal fate as when he was alive.I recommend this movie if you like to watch something different; the plot is something you haven't seen in any other slasher flick because it's taken seriously. If you give the movie a try you will be pleased.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-201

ur2843647

title: Forget about the 80's Krueger. This one takes the character seriously. review: The best thing about "New Nightmare" is it's plot because it's a 180ª change in the Nightmare series. Putting Freddy Krueger on the real world was an idea that most Horror fans accepted because the genre seemed to be dead in the mid 90's.Other thing that fans of the genre and especially fans of the series praised was the inclusion of favorite characters. Nancy and her father Lt. Thompson return to put an end to Freddy for once and all. Heather L. delivers a great performance and seemed to really love her character and the series in general. John Saxon is great as always. Both characters add a nostalgic touch to the series. The rest of the cast is okay. Heather's son delivers a good performance and became quickly a favorite.Although Krueger has minimal on-screen time, it's justified by the plot and it surely works. Freddy Krueger used to be scary and menacing and in this final movie he returns to his roots. Great performance by Robert Englund.The ending is decent and is somehow a good way to end Freddy's reign of terror. He goes through the same fatal fate as when he was alive.I recommend this movie if you like to watch something different; the plot is something you haven't seen in any other slasher flick because it's taken seriously. If you give the movie a try you will be pleased.

Perhaps not all it could have been, but still the best other than the original

tt0111686

This is not for everyone. Those who like the series(and the fact that it is one) won't be satisfied by this, and it wasn't made with them in mind. Craven returns, and he has a high concept. Does he completely pull it off? Not without a scrape here and there along the way, and the execution of the smart, meta concept isn't entirely spot-on. The plot is engaging: After all the sequels(that this rightfully pokes a little fun at without losing its seriousness), the man who gave us the '84 classic returns. He's had a new idea. At the same time, Langenkamp is experiencing strange phenomena. Has Krueger crossed into the real world? This does what these badly needed; it makes him scary again. Scratch that. It makes him freaking terrifying! How does it go about this? After five flicks that fleshed him out, this drops all of that, giving him back his mystery(and building him up). This is not the one we've gotten used to. He's darker(no, I mean that... and no, I didn't think it could happen, either), pure evil(he does still use a few one-liners). This is a fairly deep, reflective piece, and it comments on censorship(fitting that it be one of Wes' only films that he got final cut on) and the nature of the genre and why it is important. There are callbacks to the first one, worked in well and not making it campy. This is genuinely funny, never trying too hard. It is filmed and edited really well, and plays on primal fears once again. This is suspenseful, creepy and astonishingly intense(the latter especially in the memorable and grand finale). The effective and eerie score helps a lot. Acting varies a tad, though the leads do well and no one is *awful*. The kid is pretty good, if at times annoying. I found myself liking, relating to and caring about the characters. There is a lot of blood, a little gore, disturbing and disgusting content and occasional strong language in this. The Ultimate Collector's Edition 7-Disc DVD set comes with an excellent, informational and interesting director's commentary, 32 and a half minutes of informative interviews, the Jump To A Nightmare feature and a great trailer. I recommend this to anyone that it sounds appealing to. 7/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-272

ur2093818

title: Perhaps not all it could have been, but still the best other than the original review: This is not for everyone. Those who like the series(and the fact that it is one) won't be satisfied by this, and it wasn't made with them in mind. Craven returns, and he has a high concept. Does he completely pull it off? Not without a scrape here and there along the way, and the execution of the smart, meta concept isn't entirely spot-on. The plot is engaging: After all the sequels(that this rightfully pokes a little fun at without losing its seriousness), the man who gave us the '84 classic returns. He's had a new idea. At the same time, Langenkamp is experiencing strange phenomena. Has Krueger crossed into the real world? This does what these badly needed; it makes him scary again. Scratch that. It makes him freaking terrifying! How does it go about this? After five flicks that fleshed him out, this drops all of that, giving him back his mystery(and building him up). This is not the one we've gotten used to. He's darker(no, I mean that... and no, I didn't think it could happen, either), pure evil(he does still use a few one-liners). This is a fairly deep, reflective piece, and it comments on censorship(fitting that it be one of Wes' only films that he got final cut on) and the nature of the genre and why it is important. There are callbacks to the first one, worked in well and not making it campy. This is genuinely funny, never trying too hard. It is filmed and edited really well, and plays on primal fears once again. This is suspenseful, creepy and astonishingly intense(the latter especially in the memorable and grand finale). The effective and eerie score helps a lot. Acting varies a tad, though the leads do well and no one is *awful*. The kid is pretty good, if at times annoying. I found myself liking, relating to and caring about the characters. There is a lot of blood, a little gore, disturbing and disgusting content and occasional strong language in this. The Ultimate Collector's Edition 7-Disc DVD set comes with an excellent, informational and interesting director's commentary, 32 and a half minutes of informative interviews, the Jump To A Nightmare feature and a great trailer. I recommend this to anyone that it sounds appealing to. 7/10

Great sequel

tt0111686

Rated R for Violence/Gore and Language.The Nightmare On Elm Street series is one of my favorite horror film series.The films are fun mixing tons of gore with humor(except this and the first film which were fairly dark).There have been a total of seven films in the series(eight including Freddy Vs Jason).They are all good in my opinion.This sequel does not disappoint.For those who didn't like the comedy route the series was taking, this film goes back to pure horror and no comedy.Its directed by Wes Craven who directed the first film and has most of the original cast from the first film(except Johnny Depp who was by now a big star).This film takes place in the real world,Heather Lagenkamp, the woman who was in Nightmare On Elm STreet 1 or 3 returns and she plays herself.So do most of the cast members.Robert Englund plays both himself and Freddy Kruger.Basically the plot of this film is about there being a demon who represents Freddy Kruger.Angry that they killed of Freddy in the last film, he decides to get revenge on the actress Heather Lagenkamp who has a son named Dylan.Freddy Kruger looks much darker and different than in the previous films.New NIghtmare is a very entertaining film that is most like the original.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-226

ur11358734

title: Great sequel review: Rated R for Violence/Gore and Language.The Nightmare On Elm Street series is one of my favorite horror film series.The films are fun mixing tons of gore with humor(except this and the first film which were fairly dark).There have been a total of seven films in the series(eight including Freddy Vs Jason).They are all good in my opinion.This sequel does not disappoint.For those who didn't like the comedy route the series was taking, this film goes back to pure horror and no comedy.Its directed by Wes Craven who directed the first film and has most of the original cast from the first film(except Johnny Depp who was by now a big star).This film takes place in the real world,Heather Lagenkamp, the woman who was in Nightmare On Elm STreet 1 or 3 returns and she plays herself.So do most of the cast members.Robert Englund plays both himself and Freddy Kruger.Basically the plot of this film is about there being a demon who represents Freddy Kruger.Angry that they killed of Freddy in the last film, he decides to get revenge on the actress Heather Lagenkamp who has a son named Dylan.Freddy Kruger looks much darker and different than in the previous films.New NIghtmare is a very entertaining film that is most like the original.

Wes Craven's New Nightmare

tt0111686

It looked like for some time Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare was the final time scary movie fans would see the iconic razor handed "Son of 100 Maniacs", but then original film writer and director Wes Craven (The Hills Have Eyes, Scream) came up with this clever comeback. Basically the tenth anniversary of the movie A Nightmare on Elm Street is coming up, and original star Heather Langenkamp is part of the special events celebrating, along with its director Wes Craven, and of course the man behind killer Freddy Krueger, actor Robert Englund. She has a happy life with husband Chase Porter (David Newsom) and son Dylan (Miko Hughes), but she is being stalked by a nasty voice on the phone, and creepy goings on in her house, and things get worse when her husband is killed in a car crash, and his body has slash marks on it. Dylan is refusing to sleep anymore, because he is scared, like the movie, that Freddy will come in his dream and try to kill him, and dealing with this Heather is also being offered a part in the next Nightmare film Wes is working on, but the script needs work. Heather is finding the behaviour of her son uncontrollable, and she does believe Freddy is haunting her, Wes comes up with the theory that now the Elm Street films are over an ancient spirit must have helped him come out of the fictional world to enter dreams in real life, and his script may be part of this way out. It comes to the point when Dylan may be taken away from Heather due to his psychologically disturbed behaviour, but she is also incarcerated by doctors who believe she is going mad, of course Freddy continues his kills while this is going on. Eventually Heather, like her character, enters a dream to confront Freddy and stop the terror, and she manages to lock him in a furnace to burn to death, and returning to the real world she and her son read the new finished sample script sent by Wes. I like films where actors play a version of themselves, you could see this as semi-documentary considering the concept of how to bring back a character supposedly dead for good, the story has its moments of irritation, especially with the doctors breaking up the mother and son, but the script has clever references and ideas, and there is just enough Freddy and gore for the fans, a not bad horror film. Worth watching!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-293

ur4248714

title: Wes Craven's New Nightmare review: It looked like for some time Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare was the final time scary movie fans would see the iconic razor handed "Son of 100 Maniacs", but then original film writer and director Wes Craven (The Hills Have Eyes, Scream) came up with this clever comeback. Basically the tenth anniversary of the movie A Nightmare on Elm Street is coming up, and original star Heather Langenkamp is part of the special events celebrating, along with its director Wes Craven, and of course the man behind killer Freddy Krueger, actor Robert Englund. She has a happy life with husband Chase Porter (David Newsom) and son Dylan (Miko Hughes), but she is being stalked by a nasty voice on the phone, and creepy goings on in her house, and things get worse when her husband is killed in a car crash, and his body has slash marks on it. Dylan is refusing to sleep anymore, because he is scared, like the movie, that Freddy will come in his dream and try to kill him, and dealing with this Heather is also being offered a part in the next Nightmare film Wes is working on, but the script needs work. Heather is finding the behaviour of her son uncontrollable, and she does believe Freddy is haunting her, Wes comes up with the theory that now the Elm Street films are over an ancient spirit must have helped him come out of the fictional world to enter dreams in real life, and his script may be part of this way out. It comes to the point when Dylan may be taken away from Heather due to his psychologically disturbed behaviour, but she is also incarcerated by doctors who believe she is going mad, of course Freddy continues his kills while this is going on. Eventually Heather, like her character, enters a dream to confront Freddy and stop the terror, and she manages to lock him in a furnace to burn to death, and returning to the real world she and her son read the new finished sample script sent by Wes. I like films where actors play a version of themselves, you could see this as semi-documentary considering the concept of how to bring back a character supposedly dead for good, the story has its moments of irritation, especially with the doctors breaking up the mother and son, but the script has clever references and ideas, and there is just enough Freddy and gore for the fans, a not bad horror film. Worth watching!

Breathing new life into a masterful creation

tt0111686

I was expecting very little in the way of this sequel. The others grew tired and lifeless, with on again, off again, decent performances turned in by Robert Englund as Freddy, and some decent, not so decent script writing. Frankly, you just never know what TO expect with long-running franchises such as this. But what I got was NOT what I expected. Nothing close.I had to view this three times. At my first viewing, I was so surprised, I immediately said, "I need to watch this again." Upon my third viewing, I realized that what I was watching was the resurrection of one of my favorite franchises! I was (if only momentarily) struck speechless. I'm trying not to "gush" here, or exaggerate, so do not take it lightly when I say that I believe this is possibly the most creative work Craven has ever directed. Don't get me wrong, aside from "Last House on the Left," I've enjoyed everything Craven's put out, including those annoyingly clichéd "Scream" movies. (Just for your info though, I only didn't like Last House on the Left because I do not find entertainment in exploitation, it IS a fine low budget, independent exploitation film, just not my cup of tea.) But "New Nightmare" is just not a recycling of the same tired old story with a new kick. It's a new take on a long-standing favorite BY the creator. For what more could you ask?It rates an easy 8.5/10 from...the Fiend :.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111686/reviews-177

ur2626332

title: Breathing new life into a masterful creation review: I was expecting very little in the way of this sequel. The others grew tired and lifeless, with on again, off again, decent performances turned in by Robert Englund as Freddy, and some decent, not so decent script writing. Frankly, you just never know what TO expect with long-running franchises such as this. But what I got was NOT what I expected. Nothing close.I had to view this three times. At my first viewing, I was so surprised, I immediately said, "I need to watch this again." Upon my third viewing, I realized that what I was watching was the resurrection of one of my favorite franchises! I was (if only momentarily) struck speechless. I'm trying not to "gush" here, or exaggerate, so do not take it lightly when I say that I believe this is possibly the most creative work Craven has ever directed. Don't get me wrong, aside from "Last House on the Left," I've enjoyed everything Craven's put out, including those annoyingly clichéd "Scream" movies. (Just for your info though, I only didn't like Last House on the Left because I do not find entertainment in exploitation, it IS a fine low budget, independent exploitation film, just not my cup of tea.) But "New Nightmare" is just not a recycling of the same tired old story with a new kick. It's a new take on a long-standing favorite BY the creator. For what more could you ask?It rates an easy 8.5/10 from...the Fiend :.

Melancholic Comedy About Intimacy

tt1535438

Meryl Streep is a wonder, let's start right there. After her towering portrayal of Margaret Thatcher, an ordinary woman in real danger of disappearing all together. Real and enormously moving. Tommy Lee Jones gives us a face we hadn't seen before. Someone so settled in his ways that he doesn't notice what's happening around him. That's why, I though, his realization is so poignant. The film is based on a solid script but the direction is sluggish and uncertain to say the least. It feels as if the director didn't trust his material. The songs and the score, out of a Lifetime TV movie, doesn't allow us to connect with the real truths unfolding in the screen. That, I must confess, was very annoying. I recommend the film on the strength of the two central performances. Intimacy between two grown ups reflected on every look on every move until the score comes to interfere and derail our emotions.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-23

ur12449122

title: Melancholic Comedy About Intimacy review: Meryl Streep is a wonder, let's start right there. After her towering portrayal of Margaret Thatcher, an ordinary woman in real danger of disappearing all together. Real and enormously moving. Tommy Lee Jones gives us a face we hadn't seen before. Someone so settled in his ways that he doesn't notice what's happening around him. That's why, I though, his realization is so poignant. The film is based on a solid script but the direction is sluggish and uncertain to say the least. It feels as if the director didn't trust his material. The songs and the score, out of a Lifetime TV movie, doesn't allow us to connect with the real truths unfolding in the screen. That, I must confess, was very annoying. I recommend the film on the strength of the two central performances. Intimacy between two grown ups reflected on every look on every move until the score comes to interfere and derail our emotions.

Uncomfortably Private, Squirmy, Heavy-Handed

tt1535438

"Hope Springs" was an often uncomfortable watch. It's subject matter felt like eavesdropping on a couple's intimate quarrel and not in a good way. The movie made me squirm and fast-forward past awful sex-talk counselling. This wasn't really comedic at all; it's just a straight lack of integrity. There are a few chuckles and some cathartic type moments thanks to the acting talents, but this movie is not what I was expecting or entertaining You can get similar information from books or websites. Instead of characters being able to work things out or not through their own, we get a video-style shrink session with Steve Carrell. And the horrible cringeworthy intimacy foibles as well as heavy-handed music video "why" by Annie Lennox - ugh. Do not recommend. 4/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-171

ur0635312

title: Uncomfortably Private, Squirmy, Heavy-Handed review: "Hope Springs" was an often uncomfortable watch. It's subject matter felt like eavesdropping on a couple's intimate quarrel and not in a good way. The movie made me squirm and fast-forward past awful sex-talk counselling. This wasn't really comedic at all; it's just a straight lack of integrity. There are a few chuckles and some cathartic type moments thanks to the acting talents, but this movie is not what I was expecting or entertaining You can get similar information from books or websites. Instead of characters being able to work things out or not through their own, we get a video-style shrink session with Steve Carrell. And the horrible cringeworthy intimacy foibles as well as heavy-handed music video "why" by Annie Lennox - ugh. Do not recommend. 4/10

Streep And Jones Elevates This Film

tt1535438

Hope Springs is a romantic comedy and drama that features Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones together with Steve Carell,Elisabeth Shue and Mimi Rogers.This movie takes a view at mature relationships particularly Kay and Arnold who has been married for decades.Kay feels that she and her husband Arnold are just going to the motions of their marriage despite the fact that they show devotion to each other.She wanted to bring up some spice into their relationship by doing various things to reconnect with her husband like seducing her at night but to no avail as he apparently has shown no interest.This led her to convince her husband to visit a couple therapist in town called Great Hope Springs.She had difficulty in persuading him considering his virtues of being steadfast man of routine but manages to do so in the end.During their retreat,both started to explore the challenges they are facing and find out why their marriage has become somewhat dull and boring.But ultimately,this led them to realize their shortcomings and fall for each other once again.No question that Meryl Streep once again delivers as Kay.What's good about it is the fact that she manages to provide a very sexual performance as an aging wife who needs to do something about her lifeless marriage.What's good is that Tommy Lee Jones manages to complement her acting talent as the disinterested husband.Their chemistry and comedic talent shines throughout the film.Although this film could be boring especially for the young audience who have yet to experience what Kay and Arnold are experiencing,I still was somehow felt entertained due to the lead stars performance as they managed to elevate the film despite its average script and direction.Also,it is worth giving credit to the supporting cast for providing spice to what could have been a generic movie without Streep and Jones.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-176

ur5291991

title: Streep And Jones Elevates This Film review: Hope Springs is a romantic comedy and drama that features Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones together with Steve Carell,Elisabeth Shue and Mimi Rogers.This movie takes a view at mature relationships particularly Kay and Arnold who has been married for decades.Kay feels that she and her husband Arnold are just going to the motions of their marriage despite the fact that they show devotion to each other.She wanted to bring up some spice into their relationship by doing various things to reconnect with her husband like seducing her at night but to no avail as he apparently has shown no interest.This led her to convince her husband to visit a couple therapist in town called Great Hope Springs.She had difficulty in persuading him considering his virtues of being steadfast man of routine but manages to do so in the end.During their retreat,both started to explore the challenges they are facing and find out why their marriage has become somewhat dull and boring.But ultimately,this led them to realize their shortcomings and fall for each other once again.No question that Meryl Streep once again delivers as Kay.What's good about it is the fact that she manages to provide a very sexual performance as an aging wife who needs to do something about her lifeless marriage.What's good is that Tommy Lee Jones manages to complement her acting talent as the disinterested husband.Their chemistry and comedic talent shines throughout the film.Although this film could be boring especially for the young audience who have yet to experience what Kay and Arnold are experiencing,I still was somehow felt entertained due to the lead stars performance as they managed to elevate the film despite its average script and direction.Also,it is worth giving credit to the supporting cast for providing spice to what could have been a generic movie without Streep and Jones.

Hope Springs (2012) **

tt1535438

Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep play an older couple who've been married for so many years that the spice has disappeared from their relationship. Sound familiar? Unsurprisingly, it's Jones who's lost sexual interest in Streep. Also not shockingly, it is the wife who decides they need to energize their marriage before it's too late, and is the one who urges that the two of them try marriage counseling. Couldn't you guess? She decides there's a perfect counselor in Maine, and that getting away for some quality time in the bargain can't hurt. You can also write the rest of the script from there with your eyes closed.That's not to say there are no charming and humorous moments to be found in HOPE SPRINGS; there are a couple of them. And Streep and Jones make a pretty engaging tired old pair of spouses. Steve Carell is cast as the younger marriage counselor, and he's also a good choice for the part which he plays perfectly straight. It's just that something more fresh might have been attempted here to try and break convention and keep us surprised. ** out of ****

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-99

ur3441650

title: Hope Springs (2012) ** review: Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep play an older couple who've been married for so many years that the spice has disappeared from their relationship. Sound familiar? Unsurprisingly, it's Jones who's lost sexual interest in Streep. Also not shockingly, it is the wife who decides they need to energize their marriage before it's too late, and is the one who urges that the two of them try marriage counseling. Couldn't you guess? She decides there's a perfect counselor in Maine, and that getting away for some quality time in the bargain can't hurt. You can also write the rest of the script from there with your eyes closed.That's not to say there are no charming and humorous moments to be found in HOPE SPRINGS; there are a couple of them. And Streep and Jones make a pretty engaging tired old pair of spouses. Steve Carell is cast as the younger marriage counselor, and he's also a good choice for the part which he plays perfectly straight. It's just that something more fresh might have been attempted here to try and break convention and keep us surprised. ** out of ****

Sadder than Funny; Streep is Great

tt1535438

"Hope Springs" is being marketed as a comedy, but I know at least two women who cried throughout most of the film. It's sadder than it is funny, and it's a rather slight movie, with a small cast and a limited script, so there's no place to escape from the sadness of Meryl Streep's powerful and poignant depiction of Kay, a woman very unhappy in her marriage of 31 years. Tommy Lee Jones, a fascinating actor, is given almost nothing to do as Kay's husband Arnold, except to be comically grumpy and cheap. I so wish the script had made his story arch as arresting as Kay's. Steve Carell, who can be funny and poignant at the same time, is similarly wasted. Anyone could have played his part, that of the soft-spoken, gentle couples' counselor Dr. Feld. Kay is a Midwestern housewife. Her husband Arnold is an accountant and a reliable breadwinner. He has one slice of bacon, one egg, and one cup of coffee for breakfast every morning, and falls asleep every night to golf videos and golf magazines. A few years ago he had back trouble, and he decided to start sleeping in the guest bedroom. He never moved back into the bedroom he used to share with Kay. In fact Kay and Arnold no longer even touch each other. Kay insists that they take a week-long couples retreat. They do, and the story of their sexless marriage unfolds in their sessions with Dr. Feld. There are some slapstick comic bits spoofing Kay and Arnold's attempts to rediscover each other physically, but I don't think I laughed even once during the film, and I didn't hear other theater goers laugh, either. Rather, what I felt was an overwhelming urge to put my arms around Kay and comfort her. Of course I realized that this was Meryl Streep, multiple Academy-Award-winning actress, not really Kay, Midwestern housewife, but Streep's performance is so real it suspended my disbelief. In the very few scenes and lines he is given to expand on Arnold's story, I found Jones poignant as well. Given how real the sadness is in this movie, the script and director really needed to make this film deeper and more complex to earn a Hollywood ending, and a depth and complexity commensurate to that need never arise. The ending is just not believable given what has gone before. Weirdly, three known actresses appear in parts so small they practically don't exist. Mimi Rogers, Jean Smart, and Elisabeth Shue are on screen for seconds, only long enough for you to say, "Hey, is that … and wasn't she once nominated for an Academy Award … married to Tom Cruise … and what is she doing in a part this small?" Sort of underlines one of the themes of "Hope Springs": women of a certain age are just supposed to disappear.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-55

ur2366009

title: Sadder than Funny; Streep is Great review: "Hope Springs" is being marketed as a comedy, but I know at least two women who cried throughout most of the film. It's sadder than it is funny, and it's a rather slight movie, with a small cast and a limited script, so there's no place to escape from the sadness of Meryl Streep's powerful and poignant depiction of Kay, a woman very unhappy in her marriage of 31 years. Tommy Lee Jones, a fascinating actor, is given almost nothing to do as Kay's husband Arnold, except to be comically grumpy and cheap. I so wish the script had made his story arch as arresting as Kay's. Steve Carell, who can be funny and poignant at the same time, is similarly wasted. Anyone could have played his part, that of the soft-spoken, gentle couples' counselor Dr. Feld. Kay is a Midwestern housewife. Her husband Arnold is an accountant and a reliable breadwinner. He has one slice of bacon, one egg, and one cup of coffee for breakfast every morning, and falls asleep every night to golf videos and golf magazines. A few years ago he had back trouble, and he decided to start sleeping in the guest bedroom. He never moved back into the bedroom he used to share with Kay. In fact Kay and Arnold no longer even touch each other. Kay insists that they take a week-long couples retreat. They do, and the story of their sexless marriage unfolds in their sessions with Dr. Feld. There are some slapstick comic bits spoofing Kay and Arnold's attempts to rediscover each other physically, but I don't think I laughed even once during the film, and I didn't hear other theater goers laugh, either. Rather, what I felt was an overwhelming urge to put my arms around Kay and comfort her. Of course I realized that this was Meryl Streep, multiple Academy-Award-winning actress, not really Kay, Midwestern housewife, but Streep's performance is so real it suspended my disbelief. In the very few scenes and lines he is given to expand on Arnold's story, I found Jones poignant as well. Given how real the sadness is in this movie, the script and director really needed to make this film deeper and more complex to earn a Hollywood ending, and a depth and complexity commensurate to that need never arise. The ending is just not believable given what has gone before. Weirdly, three known actresses appear in parts so small they practically don't exist. Mimi Rogers, Jean Smart, and Elisabeth Shue are on screen for seconds, only long enough for you to say, "Hey, is that … and wasn't she once nominated for an Academy Award … married to Tom Cruise … and what is she doing in a part this small?" Sort of underlines one of the themes of "Hope Springs": women of a certain age are just supposed to disappear.

Streep and Lee Jones are perfectly matched and a joy to watch

tt1535438

This is one film that could die quickly if the leads can't work together. Fortunately for us, the lovely Ms. Streep works very well with Lee Jones, as a couple who have been married more than 30 years and have lost their romantic spark. Kay (Streep) is determined to save the relationship and engages the services of a professional counselor/therapist (Carrell), and things don't go too smoothly at first.It would be easy to say the film belongs to either star, and this might be true because they complement each other so well, it's hard to imagine either one not being part of a true relationship. That's how good their acting is here. Streep, as usual is on top of every minor detail, as the wife who suffers quietly, for the most part and yearns to regain what she once had. Lee Jones is the surprise here, as the man who grunts and makes a lot of noise to protect his privacy and vulnerable side. Some of the best scenes have him interacting with Carrell, who is very good as the insightful and caring professional."Hope Springs" is very good film because it manages to stay small, not go for cheap histrionics, and shows plenty of quiet moments that help you understand how partners in a marriage fail to communicate at crucial times, tentatively endangering a beautiful relationship. It is also an appeal to those members of the audience who might understand how precious it is to find and lose a soul mate. Overall, the film communicates its themes in an engaging and efficient manner.In my opinion, the film shows some of the best work done by the two leads, an example that we don't need serious costume dramas all the time to witness an artist at the top of her / his craft.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-43

ur2115026

title: Streep and Lee Jones are perfectly matched and a joy to watch review: This is one film that could die quickly if the leads can't work together. Fortunately for us, the lovely Ms. Streep works very well with Lee Jones, as a couple who have been married more than 30 years and have lost their romantic spark. Kay (Streep) is determined to save the relationship and engages the services of a professional counselor/therapist (Carrell), and things don't go too smoothly at first.It would be easy to say the film belongs to either star, and this might be true because they complement each other so well, it's hard to imagine either one not being part of a true relationship. That's how good their acting is here. Streep, as usual is on top of every minor detail, as the wife who suffers quietly, for the most part and yearns to regain what she once had. Lee Jones is the surprise here, as the man who grunts and makes a lot of noise to protect his privacy and vulnerable side. Some of the best scenes have him interacting with Carrell, who is very good as the insightful and caring professional."Hope Springs" is very good film because it manages to stay small, not go for cheap histrionics, and shows plenty of quiet moments that help you understand how partners in a marriage fail to communicate at crucial times, tentatively endangering a beautiful relationship. It is also an appeal to those members of the audience who might understand how precious it is to find and lose a soul mate. Overall, the film communicates its themes in an engaging and efficient manner.In my opinion, the film shows some of the best work done by the two leads, an example that we don't need serious costume dramas all the time to witness an artist at the top of her / his craft.

Hoped for more, but you can go wrong when you see Streep & Jones together.

tt1535438

I hoped that I would have enjoyed the dramedy "Hope Springs" as much as many critics and filmgoers did. Not to sound like a complaining old geezer, but this film about a couple in their 50's who try to rejuvenate their marriage did not spring up as a spectacular cinematic affair. "Hope Springs" stars Meryl Streep as the saucy sheriff in the town of Springsville who tells all the tourists "you, you get out of here!!"; OK, so that is not really true. I am just recalling Will Ferrell and Kristen Wiig's hilarious Best Actress in a Comedy/Musical award presentation at the Golden Globes where Streep was one of the nominees. "Hope Springs" does star Streep and Tommy Lee Jones as married couple Kay and Arnold. They have been married for 31 years but have grown very distant throughout the years, they even sleep in different bedrooms. Kay is vastly interested in bringing affection & romance back into the marriage, so she decides to enroll Arnold and her in a week-long, intense couple counseling session. Arnold is not enamored to traveling to another state for the sessions, but ends up going for the ride with Kay. Steve Carell plays Dr. Feld, the couple-counseling guru psychiatrist who heads the sessions; or in other words who wants Kay and Arnold to have a marriage that "Felds" good. Sorry, I know there are way too many puns that spring up in this review. I hope you are still with me. Now I do admire veteran Director David Frankel for highlighting a film that depicts how a longtime couple in their 50's could do a Timberlake and "bring sexy back" into their dreary marriage. But my problem with Frankel's direction is that there were too many lapses where too much of nothing happens in the picture; kind a like Kay and Arnold's sex life before they got "Feld" up. Vanessa Taylor's screenplay was not a thing of beauty, but it was decent enough for it to be Taylor- made on the verbose interactions of a married couple before they hit their twilight time. Now, I do not have one bad thing to say that would divorce you from seeing the astute performances from the great Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones as Kay and Arnold; in other words, yet once again, they rocked! However, I wasn't as psyched for Carell's work as Dr. Feld. I hope that you got the gist of my feelings for "Hope Springs" in this review; mediocre direction & writing and excellent starring performances. So it has some good and some bad; as most marriages do; new, old, or rejuvenated. *** Average

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-140

ur0489763

title: Hoped for more, but you can go wrong when you see Streep & Jones together. review: I hoped that I would have enjoyed the dramedy "Hope Springs" as much as many critics and filmgoers did. Not to sound like a complaining old geezer, but this film about a couple in their 50's who try to rejuvenate their marriage did not spring up as a spectacular cinematic affair. "Hope Springs" stars Meryl Streep as the saucy sheriff in the town of Springsville who tells all the tourists "you, you get out of here!!"; OK, so that is not really true. I am just recalling Will Ferrell and Kristen Wiig's hilarious Best Actress in a Comedy/Musical award presentation at the Golden Globes where Streep was one of the nominees. "Hope Springs" does star Streep and Tommy Lee Jones as married couple Kay and Arnold. They have been married for 31 years but have grown very distant throughout the years, they even sleep in different bedrooms. Kay is vastly interested in bringing affection & romance back into the marriage, so she decides to enroll Arnold and her in a week-long, intense couple counseling session. Arnold is not enamored to traveling to another state for the sessions, but ends up going for the ride with Kay. Steve Carell plays Dr. Feld, the couple-counseling guru psychiatrist who heads the sessions; or in other words who wants Kay and Arnold to have a marriage that "Felds" good. Sorry, I know there are way too many puns that spring up in this review. I hope you are still with me. Now I do admire veteran Director David Frankel for highlighting a film that depicts how a longtime couple in their 50's could do a Timberlake and "bring sexy back" into their dreary marriage. But my problem with Frankel's direction is that there were too many lapses where too much of nothing happens in the picture; kind a like Kay and Arnold's sex life before they got "Feld" up. Vanessa Taylor's screenplay was not a thing of beauty, but it was decent enough for it to be Taylor- made on the verbose interactions of a married couple before they hit their twilight time. Now, I do not have one bad thing to say that would divorce you from seeing the astute performances from the great Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones as Kay and Arnold; in other words, yet once again, they rocked! However, I wasn't as psyched for Carell's work as Dr. Feld. I hope that you got the gist of my feelings for "Hope Springs" in this review; mediocre direction & writing and excellent starring performances. So it has some good and some bad; as most marriages do; new, old, or rejuvenated. *** Average

Hope Springs Infernal

tt1535438

Greetings again from the darkness. I often give extra credit to filmmakers for trying something challenging and different, even if the final product might fall a bit short. What I refuse to do is ignore the opposite ... a lazy attempt by a filmmaker who thinks they can skate by just because they picked a interesting topic. Director David Frankel (The Devil Wears Prada) takes the screenplay from Vanessa Taylor and then seems to sit back and bank on the strength of three lead actors to make a statement.Meryl Streep is the greatest living actress and maybe the greatest of all-time. She can turn any character into a subject of interest and doesn't disappoint here as Kay, the disenchanted wife of Arnold, played by Tommy Lee Jones (himself an excellent actor). In an effort to save a marriage gone stale after 31 years, she books a week of intensive marriage counseling with Dr. Feld (Steve Carell). Arnold reluctantly agrees to attend despite his belief that all is "fine".What follows is not the laugh-fest promised by the trailer, but rather as semi-serious look at marriage for the over 60 generation. I say semi-serious because intense topics are raised, but the film continually makes U-Turns at each fork in the road so as to avoid coming up with any real solution or digging deeper into cause/effect. Instead, some prime opportunity is wasted for this to be either a riotous look at marital frustration or an intriguing dive into what makes men and women of this generation unable to communicate.My contention is that just because this is a movie about marriage for 60-somethings, we shouldn't give the filmmakers a gold star for effort. The great John Wooden said, "Never mistake effort for results". There are some humorous moments ... some laugh out-loud moments, but not very many. There are some serious topics broached, but only by skimming the surface. As a movie lover, I demand more.The three leads are excellent. Mr. Carell does a nice job of underplaying the counselor role. He is smart enough to know that this film belongs to Streep and Jones. There is also minor support work from Ben Rappaport, Marin Ireland, Mimi Rogers and Elisabeth Shue. All of these characters seem tossed in for variety only. None really drive the story. The first 20 minutes of the film has three songs that just overpower the scenes. It's as if the director recognized the material was lightweight.I have labeled this genre Gray Cinema, and have stated that I expect we are on the front end of this trend as baby boomers demand more movies about themselves. The trend is commendable, but again I say, we should demand more and better.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-37

ur0806494

title: Hope Springs Infernal review: Greetings again from the darkness. I often give extra credit to filmmakers for trying something challenging and different, even if the final product might fall a bit short. What I refuse to do is ignore the opposite ... a lazy attempt by a filmmaker who thinks they can skate by just because they picked a interesting topic. Director David Frankel (The Devil Wears Prada) takes the screenplay from Vanessa Taylor and then seems to sit back and bank on the strength of three lead actors to make a statement.Meryl Streep is the greatest living actress and maybe the greatest of all-time. She can turn any character into a subject of interest and doesn't disappoint here as Kay, the disenchanted wife of Arnold, played by Tommy Lee Jones (himself an excellent actor). In an effort to save a marriage gone stale after 31 years, she books a week of intensive marriage counseling with Dr. Feld (Steve Carell). Arnold reluctantly agrees to attend despite his belief that all is "fine".What follows is not the laugh-fest promised by the trailer, but rather as semi-serious look at marriage for the over 60 generation. I say semi-serious because intense topics are raised, but the film continually makes U-Turns at each fork in the road so as to avoid coming up with any real solution or digging deeper into cause/effect. Instead, some prime opportunity is wasted for this to be either a riotous look at marital frustration or an intriguing dive into what makes men and women of this generation unable to communicate.My contention is that just because this is a movie about marriage for 60-somethings, we shouldn't give the filmmakers a gold star for effort. The great John Wooden said, "Never mistake effort for results". There are some humorous moments ... some laugh out-loud moments, but not very many. There are some serious topics broached, but only by skimming the surface. As a movie lover, I demand more.The three leads are excellent. Mr. Carell does a nice job of underplaying the counselor role. He is smart enough to know that this film belongs to Streep and Jones. There is also minor support work from Ben Rappaport, Marin Ireland, Mimi Rogers and Elisabeth Shue. All of these characters seem tossed in for variety only. None really drive the story. The first 20 minutes of the film has three songs that just overpower the scenes. It's as if the director recognized the material was lightweight.I have labeled this genre Gray Cinema, and have stated that I expect we are on the front end of this trend as baby boomers demand more movies about themselves. The trend is commendable, but again I say, we should demand more and better.

Surprising Depth

tt1535438

Hope Springs covers a subject that rarely is covered in any, let alone mainstream films. Middle aged and over love and relationships in any kind of in depth sense is not considered marketable by many film companies, especially given that they so shamelessly pursue the younger market. Therefore, any time I see a film that bucks that system, I am compelled to see it. Not that Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones aren't other great reasons to see any film. This story concerns an older couple who seem to have lost their intimate mojo, in fact, so much so that one wonders if they ever had any at all. But as the story unfolds, it is apparent that they indeed once did. It just got set aside by life somehow. While at first, Tommy Lee's character does not seem interested in trying, he does love his wife and therefore, makes the effort to get back in touch with his her. If only more couples did this early on in their marriages, maybe there would be less divorce. Steve Carell - known for being wacky, at times subtle and at times over the top, does a great job helping us forget what he is most known for. As the even tempered Dr. Feld, he exudes an affable seriousness that few probably knew he had in him. Tommy Lee Jones is essentially known for his tough guy roles. Seeing him in this light, as the romantic lead is a testament to his ability as an actor. It goes without saying that Meryl Streep is a consummate performer and knows her craft so well that there is really no role that she hasn't or couldn't handle superbly. She has always been willing to fearlessly display her feelings and rises to every occasion. And now, so does Tommy Lee Jones. Be sure to watch through the credits for a bonus scene worth watching.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-154

ur2673916

title: Surprising Depth review: Hope Springs covers a subject that rarely is covered in any, let alone mainstream films. Middle aged and over love and relationships in any kind of in depth sense is not considered marketable by many film companies, especially given that they so shamelessly pursue the younger market. Therefore, any time I see a film that bucks that system, I am compelled to see it. Not that Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones aren't other great reasons to see any film. This story concerns an older couple who seem to have lost their intimate mojo, in fact, so much so that one wonders if they ever had any at all. But as the story unfolds, it is apparent that they indeed once did. It just got set aside by life somehow. While at first, Tommy Lee's character does not seem interested in trying, he does love his wife and therefore, makes the effort to get back in touch with his her. If only more couples did this early on in their marriages, maybe there would be less divorce. Steve Carell - known for being wacky, at times subtle and at times over the top, does a great job helping us forget what he is most known for. As the even tempered Dr. Feld, he exudes an affable seriousness that few probably knew he had in him. Tommy Lee Jones is essentially known for his tough guy roles. Seeing him in this light, as the romantic lead is a testament to his ability as an actor. It goes without saying that Meryl Streep is a consummate performer and knows her craft so well that there is really no role that she hasn't or couldn't handle superbly. She has always been willing to fearlessly display her feelings and rises to every occasion. And now, so does Tommy Lee Jones. Be sure to watch through the credits for a bonus scene worth watching.

Hope Springs disappointed me perhaps because my expectations weren't met

tt1535438

When I watched this on Netflix disc with my mom, I expected a funny and romantic sex comedy starring Meryl Streep, Tommy Lee Jones, and Steve Carell as the therapist. What I and Mom got was a mostly boring drama about the stagnant lives of married couple Streep and Jones with occasional amusing lines from them with Carell playing it straight with his observations and advices which wasn't what I wanted from him though he wasn't bad at it. The attempts at some sexual activity was more uncomfortable to me (and perhaps Mom though I didn't ask) than funny. So that left me quite disappointed though perhaps I'd change my mind if I were to watch this much later in life. I did like some cameos by the likes of such familiar faces like Elisabeth Shue and Mimi Rogers though...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-143

ur11228318

title: Hope Springs disappointed me perhaps because my expectations weren't met review: When I watched this on Netflix disc with my mom, I expected a funny and romantic sex comedy starring Meryl Streep, Tommy Lee Jones, and Steve Carell as the therapist. What I and Mom got was a mostly boring drama about the stagnant lives of married couple Streep and Jones with occasional amusing lines from them with Carell playing it straight with his observations and advices which wasn't what I wanted from him though he wasn't bad at it. The attempts at some sexual activity was more uncomfortable to me (and perhaps Mom though I didn't ask) than funny. So that left me quite disappointed though perhaps I'd change my mind if I were to watch this much later in life. I did like some cameos by the likes of such familiar faces like Elisabeth Shue and Mimi Rogers though...

Streep and Jones are great in couples therapy on the big screen

tt1535438

If you think it's tough to think or talk about old people having sex, try being one of said old people. "Hope Springs" pairs two Oscar-winning and well-aging talents in Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones as Kay and Arnold, who endure the ups and downs of couples counseling with the main goal of rekindling their romance in mind.This is not Arnold's idea of course. He's the pragmatic type and a textbook cynic that ought to remind you of at least one older man that you know if not your own father. It's Kay who wants to break from their routine and complete lack of intimacy and who must utilize passive-aggressive tactics to con Arnold into joining her on this trip to the Maine town of Hope Springs where a renowned couples counselor (Steve Carell) will give them one-on-one time.The film reunites Streep with director David Frankel ("The Devil Wears Prada"), but this is not a comedic affair. The script from television writer Vanessa Taylor ("Everwood," "Game of Thrones") steers clear of the obvious jokes of an older, oblivious generation trying to be hip, and mostly sidesteps the awkward humor of seniors attempting to be intimate. Other than Streep's trip to the store to buy bananas, the film is decidedly dramatic, a showcase for its actors to show us what a struggling marriage really looks like.And it's not that Kay and Arnold have irreconcilable differences, but that Kay sees a problem where Arnold doesn't. The onus is then on him to recognize that her unhappiness is a sign of a problem between the two of them. As an outsider, when you consider that they sleep in different rooms and don't touch each other, it's easy to pick up on the warning signs, but Streep and Jones are so convincing that you relate to how two people could live like that for year and not suspect that something was wrong.Carell's character talks them through a lot of things in his scenes and assigns them intimacy exercises. That's it. His casting is a tremendous waste, and all he has to do is sound like a therapist who gives a damn and knows what he's talking about.Ultimately, too much of "Hope Springs" is spent in therapy. Jones and Streep give convincing reactions to the questions and what else they're asked to think about, but the final product is a cinematic depiction of couples therapy for seniors. The script tells it how it is, but to keep the dramatic tension going, Taylor inserts scenes in which Arnold and/or Kay completely freak out when things look to be going well. The emotional ups and downs are a roller coaster of greatly exaggerated proportions. Doing so does avoid the typical rom-com arc, so you won't exactly roll your eyes at "Hope Springs," but this presentation invites a microscope on the degree of realism.The degree of sincerity in the acting outweighs that of the plot. "Hope Springs" is in essence the case study of a relationship, and as such its leads need to be convincing individually and as a couple. Streep and Jones do this touchingly, even though the twists in the plot throw a great deal of challenges their way. They — and to its credit, the film — manage to awaken the emotionally in tune and bold romantic in all of us, though perhaps that should be left for seniors to determine.~Steven CThanks for reading! Visit moviemusereviews.com for more

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-134

ur2496397

title: Streep and Jones are great in couples therapy on the big screen review: If you think it's tough to think or talk about old people having sex, try being one of said old people. "Hope Springs" pairs two Oscar-winning and well-aging talents in Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones as Kay and Arnold, who endure the ups and downs of couples counseling with the main goal of rekindling their romance in mind.This is not Arnold's idea of course. He's the pragmatic type and a textbook cynic that ought to remind you of at least one older man that you know if not your own father. It's Kay who wants to break from their routine and complete lack of intimacy and who must utilize passive-aggressive tactics to con Arnold into joining her on this trip to the Maine town of Hope Springs where a renowned couples counselor (Steve Carell) will give them one-on-one time.The film reunites Streep with director David Frankel ("The Devil Wears Prada"), but this is not a comedic affair. The script from television writer Vanessa Taylor ("Everwood," "Game of Thrones") steers clear of the obvious jokes of an older, oblivious generation trying to be hip, and mostly sidesteps the awkward humor of seniors attempting to be intimate. Other than Streep's trip to the store to buy bananas, the film is decidedly dramatic, a showcase for its actors to show us what a struggling marriage really looks like.And it's not that Kay and Arnold have irreconcilable differences, but that Kay sees a problem where Arnold doesn't. The onus is then on him to recognize that her unhappiness is a sign of a problem between the two of them. As an outsider, when you consider that they sleep in different rooms and don't touch each other, it's easy to pick up on the warning signs, but Streep and Jones are so convincing that you relate to how two people could live like that for year and not suspect that something was wrong.Carell's character talks them through a lot of things in his scenes and assigns them intimacy exercises. That's it. His casting is a tremendous waste, and all he has to do is sound like a therapist who gives a damn and knows what he's talking about.Ultimately, too much of "Hope Springs" is spent in therapy. Jones and Streep give convincing reactions to the questions and what else they're asked to think about, but the final product is a cinematic depiction of couples therapy for seniors. The script tells it how it is, but to keep the dramatic tension going, Taylor inserts scenes in which Arnold and/or Kay completely freak out when things look to be going well. The emotional ups and downs are a roller coaster of greatly exaggerated proportions. Doing so does avoid the typical rom-com arc, so you won't exactly roll your eyes at "Hope Springs," but this presentation invites a microscope on the degree of realism.The degree of sincerity in the acting outweighs that of the plot. "Hope Springs" is in essence the case study of a relationship, and as such its leads need to be convincing individually and as a couple. Streep and Jones do this touchingly, even though the twists in the plot throw a great deal of challenges their way. They — and to its credit, the film — manage to awaken the emotionally in tune and bold romantic in all of us, though perhaps that should be left for seniors to determine.~Steven CThanks for reading! Visit moviemusereviews.com for more

Streep and Jones shine in a simple film

tt1535438

¨He is everything. But I'm... I'm really lonely. And to be with someone, when you're not really with him can... it's... I think I might be less lonely... alone.¨ Hope Springs was one of those movies I wish I could've enjoyed a little more because it had some great performances and a decent story. The movie really felt authentic to me, but I did get bored during several points of the movie. Everyone knows how great and talented Meryl Streep is; she is one of the greatest actresses of all time in my opinion. Once again she is outstanding in her role here alongside Tommy Lee Jones who also gives an authentic performance playing her husband for 30 years. Whatever romance there might have been in the past, it is long gone now as the two live together but it might as well be like they are in two separate worlds. There are several funny moments in the film of course, but it's also combined with a lot of drama and sadness. I can imagine some old couples relating to this story, but the film; I'm afraid, won't attract a younger audience. Hope Springs was directed by David Frankel, who worked in the past with Streep in The Devil Wears Prada (one of my favorite performances from Streep). Frankel also directed more recently the heartfelt film Marley and Me. I would recommend any of those two movies over this one. What surprised me the most about this film was that it was written by the young Vanessa Taylor (who has written for several TV series such as Game of Thrones, Alias, and Everwood). I expected it to be written by a senior writer considering the material, but she did write a very good and believable script. Although I must say that Meryl Streep can make any script sound believable.The plot is pretty simple: Kay (Meryl Streep) and Arnold (Tommy Lee Jones) have been married for over 30 years. They seem to have a stable relationship, but they sleep in separate rooms and have hardly any communication between each other. Arnold shows no affection for Kay anymore and he thinks everything is fine, but Kay feels alone and wants to reignite the spark of their marriage. Kay decides to sign Arnold and her for an intense one week marriage therapy session in Hope Springs with Dr. Feld (Steve Carell). When Arnold hears about it, he gets pretty upset at first but he decides to go anyway to comply with his wife, although he nags about it during the whole trip. Dr. Feld helps the couple discover where their love for each other has drifted apart and despite some reluctance at first, Arnold decides to go along with the therapy lessons. Things won't be easy, but both must try their best to reignite the lost flame of their love before it's too late. Thus the challenge for the couple begins.The title in Spanish for this movie ¨¿Que voy a hacer con mi marido?¨ literally means What Am I Going to Do With My Husband? Perhaps a more appropriate and inventive title than Hope Springs. The truth of the matter is that Kay has put everything on the line in her marriage, and Arnold is the one who has held back. The challenge really is on him to rebuild the love he once had for her. Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep were great together; they really looked like a true couple. I give this film 3 stars out of five mostly because of their performance together. Steve Carell as the therapist had a different role than the one he usually plays. He did a decent job although he was outshined by the two stars of the film. Surprisingly he didn't have a comedic moment in this film. Most funny moments come from the couple trying to rediscover their lost love for each other. This film isn't for everyone. Younger audiences probably won't enjoy this too much, but Streep fans will be pleased with her work. I still enjoyed the movie.http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-97

ur13566917

title: Streep and Jones shine in a simple film review: ¨He is everything. But I'm... I'm really lonely. And to be with someone, when you're not really with him can... it's... I think I might be less lonely... alone.¨ Hope Springs was one of those movies I wish I could've enjoyed a little more because it had some great performances and a decent story. The movie really felt authentic to me, but I did get bored during several points of the movie. Everyone knows how great and talented Meryl Streep is; she is one of the greatest actresses of all time in my opinion. Once again she is outstanding in her role here alongside Tommy Lee Jones who also gives an authentic performance playing her husband for 30 years. Whatever romance there might have been in the past, it is long gone now as the two live together but it might as well be like they are in two separate worlds. There are several funny moments in the film of course, but it's also combined with a lot of drama and sadness. I can imagine some old couples relating to this story, but the film; I'm afraid, won't attract a younger audience. Hope Springs was directed by David Frankel, who worked in the past with Streep in The Devil Wears Prada (one of my favorite performances from Streep). Frankel also directed more recently the heartfelt film Marley and Me. I would recommend any of those two movies over this one. What surprised me the most about this film was that it was written by the young Vanessa Taylor (who has written for several TV series such as Game of Thrones, Alias, and Everwood). I expected it to be written by a senior writer considering the material, but she did write a very good and believable script. Although I must say that Meryl Streep can make any script sound believable.The plot is pretty simple: Kay (Meryl Streep) and Arnold (Tommy Lee Jones) have been married for over 30 years. They seem to have a stable relationship, but they sleep in separate rooms and have hardly any communication between each other. Arnold shows no affection for Kay anymore and he thinks everything is fine, but Kay feels alone and wants to reignite the spark of their marriage. Kay decides to sign Arnold and her for an intense one week marriage therapy session in Hope Springs with Dr. Feld (Steve Carell). When Arnold hears about it, he gets pretty upset at first but he decides to go anyway to comply with his wife, although he nags about it during the whole trip. Dr. Feld helps the couple discover where their love for each other has drifted apart and despite some reluctance at first, Arnold decides to go along with the therapy lessons. Things won't be easy, but both must try their best to reignite the lost flame of their love before it's too late. Thus the challenge for the couple begins.The title in Spanish for this movie ¨¿Que voy a hacer con mi marido?¨ literally means What Am I Going to Do With My Husband? Perhaps a more appropriate and inventive title than Hope Springs. The truth of the matter is that Kay has put everything on the line in her marriage, and Arnold is the one who has held back. The challenge really is on him to rebuild the love he once had for her. Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep were great together; they really looked like a true couple. I give this film 3 stars out of five mostly because of their performance together. Steve Carell as the therapist had a different role than the one he usually plays. He did a decent job although he was outshined by the two stars of the film. Surprisingly he didn't have a comedic moment in this film. Most funny moments come from the couple trying to rediscover their lost love for each other. This film isn't for everyone. Younger audiences probably won't enjoy this too much, but Streep fans will be pleased with her work. I still enjoyed the movie.http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

Veteran Cast Tries To Mend Fences

tt1535438

This is basically a story of a marriage in trouble after 31 years and an empty nest due to a lack on intimate relations. The fact that Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep are the married folks gives it a different taste. The sad thing is in spite of a subject which is not addressed properly by Hollywood it is tenderly touched here but still left hanging out at the end. Some thrillingly explicit therapy is tried here, in a theater no less, but it is the common one.Without a R rating, the film actually addresses oral relations but as the author is a woman, it only addresses it in one fashion. For some reason women do not like to receive oral relations from a man, only from a woman. It would have spiced up the theater scene if that were done. The film proposes a kinky 3 person fantasy but does not follow through. Most of the realism centers on the fact that after 31 years, a couple has gotten bored with each other. Still this is done carefully in an area that is often taboo in a pg rated film.The scenery is terrific in the film. The acting is solid. What is lacking is the excitement which must be why it made the PG rating. For some reason Jones and Streep do not seem to have a lot of chemistry, especially Jones as he can not seem to exceed his bored sense of character.Still, this is the kind of subject that begs to be attacked more often and more realistically than it is dealt with now. It does do a little bit about dealing with the subject of marriages lacking spark but it breaks very little new ground on the subject.I think this subject will get more exciting in the next generation as that generation will start dealing more with women getting more of what some of them want on the receiving end. It does surprise me seeing Streep in the early scenes being turned down coldly by Jones. The thing is they never seem to really warm up properly, even after extensive therapy. Most of the time in real long term relationships, I am not sure how true this actually rings. It is a bit Hollywoodized here.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-139

ur4067661

title: Veteran Cast Tries To Mend Fences review: This is basically a story of a marriage in trouble after 31 years and an empty nest due to a lack on intimate relations. The fact that Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep are the married folks gives it a different taste. The sad thing is in spite of a subject which is not addressed properly by Hollywood it is tenderly touched here but still left hanging out at the end. Some thrillingly explicit therapy is tried here, in a theater no less, but it is the common one.Without a R rating, the film actually addresses oral relations but as the author is a woman, it only addresses it in one fashion. For some reason women do not like to receive oral relations from a man, only from a woman. It would have spiced up the theater scene if that were done. The film proposes a kinky 3 person fantasy but does not follow through. Most of the realism centers on the fact that after 31 years, a couple has gotten bored with each other. Still this is done carefully in an area that is often taboo in a pg rated film.The scenery is terrific in the film. The acting is solid. What is lacking is the excitement which must be why it made the PG rating. For some reason Jones and Streep do not seem to have a lot of chemistry, especially Jones as he can not seem to exceed his bored sense of character.Still, this is the kind of subject that begs to be attacked more often and more realistically than it is dealt with now. It does do a little bit about dealing with the subject of marriages lacking spark but it breaks very little new ground on the subject.I think this subject will get more exciting in the next generation as that generation will start dealing more with women getting more of what some of them want on the receiving end. It does surprise me seeing Streep in the early scenes being turned down coldly by Jones. The thing is they never seem to really warm up properly, even after extensive therapy. Most of the time in real long term relationships, I am not sure how true this actually rings. It is a bit Hollywoodized here.

Streep and Jones have perfect chemistry in this excellent, emotionally satisfying distillation of a middle-aged couple in crisis

tt1535438

I had high hopes for 'Hope Springs' and was not disappointed, as it was directed by David Frankel, responsible for the excellent 'Devil Wears Prada'. How can you go wrong with icons such as Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones who have great chemistry together as Kay and Arnold Soames, a middle-aged couple, who have lost the spark in their marriage.The film proceeds methodically and with great subtlety as the stultifying relationship between the couple is stripped away during marriage counseling sessions with Dr. Bernie Feld (here Steve Carell does an excellent job playing a 'straight man', in a rare non-comedy role).When we're first introduced to the 'ordinary world' of Kay and Arnold, most people who have been married for a long time, will see quite a bit of themselves in this relationship. Arnold (a partner in an Omaha accounting firm) has alienated his wife through his curmudgeonly ways—watching golf on TV all the time and showing her zero affection. The most exciting thing that Kay reveals to her adult children, who are visiting for the holidays, is that they've just purchased a new cable TV subscription.The inciting incident occurs when Kay dips into her savings and purchases a one week getaway in Maine, to see Dr. Feld for "intense" marriage counseling. Arnold thinks it's a ridiculous idea and Kay announces she's going anyway, whether Arnold decides to go or not. The fact that Arnold joins her on the trip despite his earlier opposition, is significant, as it indicates that he's not completely hopeless. As we break into Act II, Kay and Arnold begin having counseling sessions with Dr. Feld. Arnold's resistance to therapy is quite strong in the beginning but they do have a breakthrough when they're able to hug one another in bed (this is Dr. Feld's 'sexercise #1'). The stakes are raised when he begins asking pointed questions about their sex life. Kay is so inhibited that she admits that she's had no sexual fantasies during the life of their marriage. The minor 'victory' of cuddling in bed is short-lived, as we arrive at the 'mid-point' with Arnold storming out of a session after he fails to take responsibility for sabotaging Dr. Feld's 'Sexercise #2' (touching one another sexually, in bed). What Arnold actually doesn't like is being exposed as a hypocrite, self-righteously asserting that he made all these sacrifices for Kay (such as never cheating on her, as this was some kind of badge of honor). In reality, he can't own up to the fact that he's withdrawn all affection for his wife and almost has completely sabotaged their relationship.The second half of Act II, reveals a series of obstacles that crop up, seemingly preventing the couple from achieving intimacy. First is the frank discussion that Kay and Arnold have about what they don't like about one another. Dr. Feld then asks them to have an intimate encounter in a public place (his request ends disastrously as Kay tries to give Arnold oral sex, in a movie theater). Finally, the therapy appears to be working, as Arnold's attitude appears to be changing. He manages to book dinner and an overnight stay at a fancy inn/restaurant in town (instead of the Econolodge, where they've been staying outside, on the outskirts of town). They both drink and retire to the bedroom, where they begin to make love. The second act crisis is brilliantly depicted, as Arnold won't look in Kay's eyes while about to make love, and appears to abandon interest. Kay is shattered over Arnold's indifference, which she believed, he had overcome.Dr. Feld likens the failure to consummate, like "fumbling" on the first yard line. He argues that when they first came in, they were merely in the parking lot, before going into the stadium. But Feld's words are of little consolation to the couple, especially Kay, who believes her goal to re-establish intimacy, has failed.But Dr. Feld was right all along. When you strip everything away, and the true emotions rise to the surface, eventually the damage will be repaired. So Arnold finally does have an epiphany and returns to the bedroom with Kay. The 'coda' at the end, where the couple renews their vows, is tantamount to the knight reclaiming a lost sword, after a mythic 'trial by fire' journey.Kay and Arnold are generic characters, and we only get to see a little of their back stories during the film. This isn't important, since we should be more interested in viewing the dissection of their relationship, through the film's narrative. One could argue that the film's scenarist, could have done more with the Dr. Feld character, as he seems to be too much of a 'perfect' therapist, but I'm sure there are those couples out there, who have undergone this kind of therapy, who will swear by therapists such as Dr. Feld.'Hope Springs' is more dialogue based, than an image based film. But due to the riveting performances of the principals, one's interest remains riveted throughout the film. For those who wish to be emotionally uplifted, 'Hope Springs' is for you.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-162

ur0225436

title: Streep and Jones have perfect chemistry in this excellent, emotionally satisfying distillation of a middle-aged couple in crisis review: I had high hopes for 'Hope Springs' and was not disappointed, as it was directed by David Frankel, responsible for the excellent 'Devil Wears Prada'. How can you go wrong with icons such as Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones who have great chemistry together as Kay and Arnold Soames, a middle-aged couple, who have lost the spark in their marriage.The film proceeds methodically and with great subtlety as the stultifying relationship between the couple is stripped away during marriage counseling sessions with Dr. Bernie Feld (here Steve Carell does an excellent job playing a 'straight man', in a rare non-comedy role).When we're first introduced to the 'ordinary world' of Kay and Arnold, most people who have been married for a long time, will see quite a bit of themselves in this relationship. Arnold (a partner in an Omaha accounting firm) has alienated his wife through his curmudgeonly ways—watching golf on TV all the time and showing her zero affection. The most exciting thing that Kay reveals to her adult children, who are visiting for the holidays, is that they've just purchased a new cable TV subscription.The inciting incident occurs when Kay dips into her savings and purchases a one week getaway in Maine, to see Dr. Feld for "intense" marriage counseling. Arnold thinks it's a ridiculous idea and Kay announces she's going anyway, whether Arnold decides to go or not. The fact that Arnold joins her on the trip despite his earlier opposition, is significant, as it indicates that he's not completely hopeless. As we break into Act II, Kay and Arnold begin having counseling sessions with Dr. Feld. Arnold's resistance to therapy is quite strong in the beginning but they do have a breakthrough when they're able to hug one another in bed (this is Dr. Feld's 'sexercise #1'). The stakes are raised when he begins asking pointed questions about their sex life. Kay is so inhibited that she admits that she's had no sexual fantasies during the life of their marriage. The minor 'victory' of cuddling in bed is short-lived, as we arrive at the 'mid-point' with Arnold storming out of a session after he fails to take responsibility for sabotaging Dr. Feld's 'Sexercise #2' (touching one another sexually, in bed). What Arnold actually doesn't like is being exposed as a hypocrite, self-righteously asserting that he made all these sacrifices for Kay (such as never cheating on her, as this was some kind of badge of honor). In reality, he can't own up to the fact that he's withdrawn all affection for his wife and almost has completely sabotaged their relationship.The second half of Act II, reveals a series of obstacles that crop up, seemingly preventing the couple from achieving intimacy. First is the frank discussion that Kay and Arnold have about what they don't like about one another. Dr. Feld then asks them to have an intimate encounter in a public place (his request ends disastrously as Kay tries to give Arnold oral sex, in a movie theater). Finally, the therapy appears to be working, as Arnold's attitude appears to be changing. He manages to book dinner and an overnight stay at a fancy inn/restaurant in town (instead of the Econolodge, where they've been staying outside, on the outskirts of town). They both drink and retire to the bedroom, where they begin to make love. The second act crisis is brilliantly depicted, as Arnold won't look in Kay's eyes while about to make love, and appears to abandon interest. Kay is shattered over Arnold's indifference, which she believed, he had overcome.Dr. Feld likens the failure to consummate, like "fumbling" on the first yard line. He argues that when they first came in, they were merely in the parking lot, before going into the stadium. But Feld's words are of little consolation to the couple, especially Kay, who believes her goal to re-establish intimacy, has failed.But Dr. Feld was right all along. When you strip everything away, and the true emotions rise to the surface, eventually the damage will be repaired. So Arnold finally does have an epiphany and returns to the bedroom with Kay. The 'coda' at the end, where the couple renews their vows, is tantamount to the knight reclaiming a lost sword, after a mythic 'trial by fire' journey.Kay and Arnold are generic characters, and we only get to see a little of their back stories during the film. This isn't important, since we should be more interested in viewing the dissection of their relationship, through the film's narrative. One could argue that the film's scenarist, could have done more with the Dr. Feld character, as he seems to be too much of a 'perfect' therapist, but I'm sure there are those couples out there, who have undergone this kind of therapy, who will swear by therapists such as Dr. Feld.'Hope Springs' is more dialogue based, than an image based film. But due to the riveting performances of the principals, one's interest remains riveted throughout the film. For those who wish to be emotionally uplifted, 'Hope Springs' is for you.

You don't have to be over 50 to like it, but it helps

tt1535438

"Hope Springs" is being sold as a comedy but it really isn't. It's a dramatic film about a couple whose marriage has been dying and will probably end soon unless they work together to revitalize it, with a few funny moments here and there. It has good acting (Meryl Streep, Tommy Lee Jones and Steve Carell are pretty much the only actors in the film so they really have time to shine). For a lot of people, seeing the movie will make them question how their relationships have evolved over the years and where they want their relationships to go. Any movie that provokes genuine intelligent conversation is a good one to see in my opinion. It's not perfect though; the soundtrack is a bit over the top at times and while it takes some interesting directions, you'll wish it went off the beaten path more often. How much you like the movie will probably depend on how much you can relate to two people who have been married for 31 years and have fallen (or nearly fallen) out of love, but I haven't even been alive that long, so there's something there for anyone who can put themselves in the shoes of these characters too. I'd definitely recommend it. (Theatrical cut version on the big screen, August 7, 2012)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-177

ur55782634

title: You don't have to be over 50 to like it, but it helps review: "Hope Springs" is being sold as a comedy but it really isn't. It's a dramatic film about a couple whose marriage has been dying and will probably end soon unless they work together to revitalize it, with a few funny moments here and there. It has good acting (Meryl Streep, Tommy Lee Jones and Steve Carell are pretty much the only actors in the film so they really have time to shine). For a lot of people, seeing the movie will make them question how their relationships have evolved over the years and where they want their relationships to go. Any movie that provokes genuine intelligent conversation is a good one to see in my opinion. It's not perfect though; the soundtrack is a bit over the top at times and while it takes some interesting directions, you'll wish it went off the beaten path more often. How much you like the movie will probably depend on how much you can relate to two people who have been married for 31 years and have fallen (or nearly fallen) out of love, but I haven't even been alive that long, so there's something there for anyone who can put themselves in the shoes of these characters too. I'd definitely recommend it. (Theatrical cut version on the big screen, August 7, 2012)

The older you are, the more you'll enjoy it

tt1535438

Kay (Meryl Streep) and Arnie (Tommy Lee Jones) are a sixty-ish couple whose marriage has become tired. Life is routine and safe, but the closeness has gone. Desperate to make them a couple once more rather than housemates, Kay enrols them in a week of relationship counselling from Dr Feld (Steve Carrell). To say that Arnie is unhappy about this is an understatement.You know you are going to get class performances from Streep and Jones (about which more later): you also get one from Carell as the understated therapist, dispassionate and compassionate at the same time. You get a good script, too, and one which Streep and Jones make the most of. This film does an excellent job of displaying truths about what time can do to relationships, truths which are uncomfortable and often painful, yet it does it with a great deal of humour (both Streep and Jones are very funny, though Jones' crumpled curmudgeon, a role which fits him like a glove, gets the lion's share of the laughs). There are time when I laughed out loud simultaneously with curling up with embarrassment and stifling tears of upset at how strongly I identified with these people. The body language is superb.This film has a built-in demographic appeal - the cinema was quite full, the audience was of an age with the central characters, and women outnumbered men by at least 3 to 1. There was a lot of laughter and, I suspect, some tears. Anyone of that age who has been in a relationship for a long time - and I'm talking about me, specifically - understands the problem faced by these two people and the film will mean a lot to them. Conversely, those who are just starting out on life's adventure are not likely to identify with it at all, and may have a considerably lower opinion.I had a very high opinion. I thought it was a thoughtful and very funny film, beautifully written and acted, my only reservation being the ending which, though satisfying, was a bit glib.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-76

ur7813355

title: The older you are, the more you'll enjoy it review: Kay (Meryl Streep) and Arnie (Tommy Lee Jones) are a sixty-ish couple whose marriage has become tired. Life is routine and safe, but the closeness has gone. Desperate to make them a couple once more rather than housemates, Kay enrols them in a week of relationship counselling from Dr Feld (Steve Carrell). To say that Arnie is unhappy about this is an understatement.You know you are going to get class performances from Streep and Jones (about which more later): you also get one from Carell as the understated therapist, dispassionate and compassionate at the same time. You get a good script, too, and one which Streep and Jones make the most of. This film does an excellent job of displaying truths about what time can do to relationships, truths which are uncomfortable and often painful, yet it does it with a great deal of humour (both Streep and Jones are very funny, though Jones' crumpled curmudgeon, a role which fits him like a glove, gets the lion's share of the laughs). There are time when I laughed out loud simultaneously with curling up with embarrassment and stifling tears of upset at how strongly I identified with these people. The body language is superb.This film has a built-in demographic appeal - the cinema was quite full, the audience was of an age with the central characters, and women outnumbered men by at least 3 to 1. There was a lot of laughter and, I suspect, some tears. Anyone of that age who has been in a relationship for a long time - and I'm talking about me, specifically - understands the problem faced by these two people and the film will mean a lot to them. Conversely, those who are just starting out on life's adventure are not likely to identify with it at all, and may have a considerably lower opinion.I had a very high opinion. I thought it was a thoughtful and very funny film, beautifully written and acted, my only reservation being the ending which, though satisfying, was a bit glib.

Jones and Streep create magic on screen

tt1535438

This story centers around Aronld(Tommy Lee Jones) and Kay(Meryl Strrep) a couple who have been married for 31 years. But lately the romance in there marriage has died down, lately they feel like roommates instead of husband and wife. But reads up on marriage therapist, Dr. Bernie Feld(Steve Carell), and wants to have a couple of sessions with Arnold in hopes it will bring the romance back. Arnold goes just to make Kay happy, despite his better judgment, but can there marriage be saved?An entertaining comedy drama, Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones are wonderful, and really sell you the premise that they are a couple going through this ordeal. Steve Carell is surprisingly good has the Dr who is trying to help them. It is saying that some people that have been married for a long time do go through this.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-29

ur4593705

title: Jones and Streep create magic on screen review: This story centers around Aronld(Tommy Lee Jones) and Kay(Meryl Strrep) a couple who have been married for 31 years. But lately the romance in there marriage has died down, lately they feel like roommates instead of husband and wife. But reads up on marriage therapist, Dr. Bernie Feld(Steve Carell), and wants to have a couple of sessions with Arnold in hopes it will bring the romance back. Arnold goes just to make Kay happy, despite his better judgment, but can there marriage be saved?An entertaining comedy drama, Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones are wonderful, and really sell you the premise that they are a couple going through this ordeal. Steve Carell is surprisingly good has the Dr who is trying to help them. It is saying that some people that have been married for a long time do go through this.

Hope Springs rewards you the time you've spent watching the therapy sessions between the couple with a near-brilliant third act spectacularly played by Streep and Jones

tt1535438

The Indian version of Big Brother reality show has a divorced couple under the same roof as two competing contestants. Although I rarely watch the show, I did manage to catch one episode where the couple fought a heated argument involving their past. The husband was extremely defensive and tried to overrule his wife's allegations by shouting back whenever she tried to put across her point while the wife on the other hand was overly submissive, holding back her voice and nodding as if accepting that everything is her own fault. These two contestants are extremely similar in their personalities to Arnold and Kay, except they seem like they are in their forties…. and they are no longer together.On the other hand, Kay and Arnold remain a couple for 31 years but seem to have lost the passion and spirit to keep their marriage alive, and therefore, on Kay's insistence, seek the help of a counselor named Dr. Feld. During their week-long sessions, they are probed about their marriage and sexual fantasies and are instructed to do tasks that shall try to resolve the 'deviated septum'/the lacunae in their marriage. This gamble has chances of putting their marriage at risk by exposing their weaknesses, but it also has gains that are worth the efforts – a glimmer of hope. Hope Springs succeeds at bringing joy and hope in not just its protagonists' lives but also in the audiences' own satisfaction with the film with its near-brilliant last twenty five minutes that is so well acted by both Streep and Jones that you as the audience member feel completely compensated for the time you have spent listening to the long counseling sessions with the couple. It keeps its plot complexity to the bare minimum by focusing majorly on Kay and Arnold; even Dr. Feld is simply there as a stimulus to change the couple's lives and so we know nothing much about him. Well, if you really think about it, would you being a patient really want to know about your counselor's personal life when you are too concerned about yourself? This limited perspective was necessary for us to realize how important the therapy was for the two, especially Kay. Kay is the faithful wife who is too old-fashioned/submissive to play the role of a seductress or a dominatrix. She is not able to give sex but is more comfortable receiving it, and so fails when she tries giving her husband pleasure in the theater on the recommendation of Dr. Feld (to whom Arnold mentions about having fantasies of banging Kay in public). Arnold finds it hard to assume charge, and neither does he allow his wife to try to fulfill his fantasies. Dr. Feld issues homework not based on predetermined theories but through permutations and combinations of whatever information the couple has given him, for example, Kay hates Arnold's lack of effort and parsimony, so Dr. Feld instructs him to take his wife on a date at an expensive hotel. The main challenge is to confront the problem in the real world, once the couple has left the holiday spot. After much winnowing and polishing, we just have to see whether the before-after effect works or not. As mentioned in the third paragraph, the last twenty five minutes of Hope Springs is worth the long (at least in terms of pace and tempo of the movie) wait. Meryl Streep evokes an emotional response in the realest sense from the audience and this isn't the first time she has done this. Watching her performance is similar to reading Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace – both are exquisitely detailed and both make everything right at the crucial moment. In War and Peace, when Natasha has a change of heart and tries to escape with Anatole, you as the reader are completely into her state of mind – you literally experience what she is experiencing. In Hope Springs, the moment came right after Arnold opens his eyes while trying to penetrate Kay and stops sex midway and the camera shows a profile view of Arnold on top of Kay – Kay realizes what has happened and covers her mouth with her hand for a second and then sits on the floor. The way Meryl reacts as Kay had me crying, but I didn't realize for a few moments that I was in tears and had a lump in my throat. Meryl makes you feel certain sensations that can be only felt when you watch something real –in Out of Africa, towards the end, when Meryl fell to her knees to beg I could actually feel my heart sink into my stomach.Arnold is very obdurate in his thinking and personality and has his defenses ready in the form of nagging, arguing and browbeating. But with every argument against him gaining strength, his whole body sinks and the only easy solution for him is to leave or neglect the problem itself. This trait is visible in almost every man since men have big egos and a will to prove they are in the right. Tommy Lee Jones channels this down to a T, and substantially assists Meryl in well, driving her character to the point of a nervous breakdown. But Tommy also shows Arnold's positive side – his sense of humor, his comforting smile and faithfulness. The performance has been overlooked by Golden Globes who have done him a favor by nominating him for 'Best Actor in Supporting Role', but it would've been a worthy contender had it been nominated. Last Words before my 1000 word count limit ends! : Let's Stay Together complement's Arnold's tastes (most men in 50s love such music) but not 'Why?' and the one playing while Kay is shopping (non-diegetic music that should've been cut out).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-116

ur14156875

title: Hope Springs rewards you the time you've spent watching the therapy sessions between the couple with a near-brilliant third act spectacularly played by Streep and Jones review: The Indian version of Big Brother reality show has a divorced couple under the same roof as two competing contestants. Although I rarely watch the show, I did manage to catch one episode where the couple fought a heated argument involving their past. The husband was extremely defensive and tried to overrule his wife's allegations by shouting back whenever she tried to put across her point while the wife on the other hand was overly submissive, holding back her voice and nodding as if accepting that everything is her own fault. These two contestants are extremely similar in their personalities to Arnold and Kay, except they seem like they are in their forties…. and they are no longer together.On the other hand, Kay and Arnold remain a couple for 31 years but seem to have lost the passion and spirit to keep their marriage alive, and therefore, on Kay's insistence, seek the help of a counselor named Dr. Feld. During their week-long sessions, they are probed about their marriage and sexual fantasies and are instructed to do tasks that shall try to resolve the 'deviated septum'/the lacunae in their marriage. This gamble has chances of putting their marriage at risk by exposing their weaknesses, but it also has gains that are worth the efforts – a glimmer of hope. Hope Springs succeeds at bringing joy and hope in not just its protagonists' lives but also in the audiences' own satisfaction with the film with its near-brilliant last twenty five minutes that is so well acted by both Streep and Jones that you as the audience member feel completely compensated for the time you have spent listening to the long counseling sessions with the couple. It keeps its plot complexity to the bare minimum by focusing majorly on Kay and Arnold; even Dr. Feld is simply there as a stimulus to change the couple's lives and so we know nothing much about him. Well, if you really think about it, would you being a patient really want to know about your counselor's personal life when you are too concerned about yourself? This limited perspective was necessary for us to realize how important the therapy was for the two, especially Kay. Kay is the faithful wife who is too old-fashioned/submissive to play the role of a seductress or a dominatrix. She is not able to give sex but is more comfortable receiving it, and so fails when she tries giving her husband pleasure in the theater on the recommendation of Dr. Feld (to whom Arnold mentions about having fantasies of banging Kay in public). Arnold finds it hard to assume charge, and neither does he allow his wife to try to fulfill his fantasies. Dr. Feld issues homework not based on predetermined theories but through permutations and combinations of whatever information the couple has given him, for example, Kay hates Arnold's lack of effort and parsimony, so Dr. Feld instructs him to take his wife on a date at an expensive hotel. The main challenge is to confront the problem in the real world, once the couple has left the holiday spot. After much winnowing and polishing, we just have to see whether the before-after effect works or not. As mentioned in the third paragraph, the last twenty five minutes of Hope Springs is worth the long (at least in terms of pace and tempo of the movie) wait. Meryl Streep evokes an emotional response in the realest sense from the audience and this isn't the first time she has done this. Watching her performance is similar to reading Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace – both are exquisitely detailed and both make everything right at the crucial moment. In War and Peace, when Natasha has a change of heart and tries to escape with Anatole, you as the reader are completely into her state of mind – you literally experience what she is experiencing. In Hope Springs, the moment came right after Arnold opens his eyes while trying to penetrate Kay and stops sex midway and the camera shows a profile view of Arnold on top of Kay – Kay realizes what has happened and covers her mouth with her hand for a second and then sits on the floor. The way Meryl reacts as Kay had me crying, but I didn't realize for a few moments that I was in tears and had a lump in my throat. Meryl makes you feel certain sensations that can be only felt when you watch something real –in Out of Africa, towards the end, when Meryl fell to her knees to beg I could actually feel my heart sink into my stomach.Arnold is very obdurate in his thinking and personality and has his defenses ready in the form of nagging, arguing and browbeating. But with every argument against him gaining strength, his whole body sinks and the only easy solution for him is to leave or neglect the problem itself. This trait is visible in almost every man since men have big egos and a will to prove they are in the right. Tommy Lee Jones channels this down to a T, and substantially assists Meryl in well, driving her character to the point of a nervous breakdown. But Tommy also shows Arnold's positive side – his sense of humor, his comforting smile and faithfulness. The performance has been overlooked by Golden Globes who have done him a favor by nominating him for 'Best Actor in Supporting Role', but it would've been a worthy contender had it been nominated. Last Words before my 1000 word count limit ends! : Let's Stay Together complement's Arnold's tastes (most men in 50s love such music) but not 'Why?' and the one playing while Kay is shopping (non-diegetic music that should've been cut out).

Hope Springs Eternal for a Marriage That Has Lost Its Way Thanks to Masterful Work from Streep and Jones

tt1535438

When I saw Meryl Streep play the seemingly facile Omaha housewife she portrays in this 2012 marital dramedy, I had an immediate flashback to an underrated romantic drama she did almost thirty years ago, Ulu Grosbard's "Falling in Love" (1984), in which she played a young married woman who couldn't help falling for a married architect (Robert De Niro) on a commuter train. I kept thinking of Kay as that earlier character all these years later trying to fan the embers of the passion that erupted so unpredictably back then. Interestingly, her younger character could not consummate the affair either but fell hopelessly in love anyway. Director David Frankel ("The Devil Wears Prada") and first-time screenwriter Vanessa Taylor travel to the opposite end of the marital spectrum, a 31-year-old marriage that finds Kay and her accountant husband Arnold sleeping in separate bedrooms having long ago lost any sense of intimacy and passion their marriage once had. The film begins with a seriocomic preface in which Kay awkwardly tries to seduce Arnold, an invitation he rebuffs with the flimsiest of excuses. Knowing their marriage is on auto-pilot, she fears being alone emotionally and ending their lives in emotional isolation now as they go through the motions in their sixties.An optimist despite the odds, Kay signs them up for a week of intensive couples therapy in Great Hope Springs, Maine, where renowned therapist Dr. Bernie Feld practices. Arnold is predictably resistant but begrudgingly accompanies her when he realizes how serious Kay is about the counseling. The sessions with Dr. Feld initially don't go well with Arnold protesting the doctor's every recommendation for building intimacy in his relationship with Kay. This is when the movie becomes the most surprising because every time a physically awkward moment presents itself, the feelings become heartfelt and sometimes humorous in unexpected ways. While Frankel and Taylor handle the slim story turns with genuine insight, it's the masterful work of Streep and Tommy Lee Jones that elevates the film into an experience that far transcends the Lifetime-TV orientation you would expect otherwise. Unafraid to come across as harshly judgmental, Jones has made a career of playing dyspeptic curmudgeons, so it's nice to see him gradually reveal Arnold's vulnerabilities with skill and delicacy. He has to play Arnold close to the vest but not so insular as to make you wonder what Kay saw in him in the first place. After tackling larger-than-life figures like Julia Child and Margaret Thatcher, Streep is splendid portraying a sheltered woman who contributes as much to the fossilized, inchoate marriage as Arnold does.At 63, the actress allows herself to look even beyond her age, but she's still beautiful in a shopworn way. I love how she almost swallows every word she speaks as if Kay's tentative nature is holding back grand expectations of a romance she can only fantasize about. The two veteran actors have a natural rapport that gives the viewer a rooting interest in seeing them overcome their age-old emotional and physical barriers. There are moments between them especially in the film's last third that are quite heartbreaking, especially when they come to learn that they aren't the people they believed themselves, or each other, to be. Steve Carell plays Feld straight-up without an iota of irony, and his clinical approach works effectively within this context. The rest of the supporting cast makes very little impact, including Jean Smart as Kay's sassy manager at the Coldwater Creek she works part-time, Elisabeth Shue as an equally sassy barmaid counseling Kay on sex, and Mimi Rogers as the final payoff of a joke about a comely (and yes, sassy) neighbor with a trio of corgis. The young actors who play Kay and Arnold's adult children are barely present, but I'm sure that was part of the intention in order to allow complete focus on the couple. Frankel overdoes the soundtrack music when moments of silence would have been far more effective, but otherwise, the tone feels spot-on.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-46

ur3608743

title: Hope Springs Eternal for a Marriage That Has Lost Its Way Thanks to Masterful Work from Streep and Jones review: When I saw Meryl Streep play the seemingly facile Omaha housewife she portrays in this 2012 marital dramedy, I had an immediate flashback to an underrated romantic drama she did almost thirty years ago, Ulu Grosbard's "Falling in Love" (1984), in which she played a young married woman who couldn't help falling for a married architect (Robert De Niro) on a commuter train. I kept thinking of Kay as that earlier character all these years later trying to fan the embers of the passion that erupted so unpredictably back then. Interestingly, her younger character could not consummate the affair either but fell hopelessly in love anyway. Director David Frankel ("The Devil Wears Prada") and first-time screenwriter Vanessa Taylor travel to the opposite end of the marital spectrum, a 31-year-old marriage that finds Kay and her accountant husband Arnold sleeping in separate bedrooms having long ago lost any sense of intimacy and passion their marriage once had. The film begins with a seriocomic preface in which Kay awkwardly tries to seduce Arnold, an invitation he rebuffs with the flimsiest of excuses. Knowing their marriage is on auto-pilot, she fears being alone emotionally and ending their lives in emotional isolation now as they go through the motions in their sixties.An optimist despite the odds, Kay signs them up for a week of intensive couples therapy in Great Hope Springs, Maine, where renowned therapist Dr. Bernie Feld practices. Arnold is predictably resistant but begrudgingly accompanies her when he realizes how serious Kay is about the counseling. The sessions with Dr. Feld initially don't go well with Arnold protesting the doctor's every recommendation for building intimacy in his relationship with Kay. This is when the movie becomes the most surprising because every time a physically awkward moment presents itself, the feelings become heartfelt and sometimes humorous in unexpected ways. While Frankel and Taylor handle the slim story turns with genuine insight, it's the masterful work of Streep and Tommy Lee Jones that elevates the film into an experience that far transcends the Lifetime-TV orientation you would expect otherwise. Unafraid to come across as harshly judgmental, Jones has made a career of playing dyspeptic curmudgeons, so it's nice to see him gradually reveal Arnold's vulnerabilities with skill and delicacy. He has to play Arnold close to the vest but not so insular as to make you wonder what Kay saw in him in the first place. After tackling larger-than-life figures like Julia Child and Margaret Thatcher, Streep is splendid portraying a sheltered woman who contributes as much to the fossilized, inchoate marriage as Arnold does.At 63, the actress allows herself to look even beyond her age, but she's still beautiful in a shopworn way. I love how she almost swallows every word she speaks as if Kay's tentative nature is holding back grand expectations of a romance she can only fantasize about. The two veteran actors have a natural rapport that gives the viewer a rooting interest in seeing them overcome their age-old emotional and physical barriers. There are moments between them especially in the film's last third that are quite heartbreaking, especially when they come to learn that they aren't the people they believed themselves, or each other, to be. Steve Carell plays Feld straight-up without an iota of irony, and his clinical approach works effectively within this context. The rest of the supporting cast makes very little impact, including Jean Smart as Kay's sassy manager at the Coldwater Creek she works part-time, Elisabeth Shue as an equally sassy barmaid counseling Kay on sex, and Mimi Rogers as the final payoff of a joke about a comely (and yes, sassy) neighbor with a trio of corgis. The young actors who play Kay and Arnold's adult children are barely present, but I'm sure that was part of the intention in order to allow complete focus on the couple. Frankel overdoes the soundtrack music when moments of silence would have been far more effective, but otherwise, the tone feels spot-on.

Sweet, melodramatic, unique and sorta fun!

tt1535438

Certainly this film is saved by powerhouse couple Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep. That isn't to say its not a good story, it is very well written. I'm just not sure it would have found an audience or the same audience as it did without Jones and Streep. The film tackles some insanely taboo subjects especially from the aspect of a senior couple married more than 30 years. It has its funny moment, its awkward moments and certainly its dramatic moments. It would be one film that would be very hard to watch in mixed company given the subject matter but that doesn't make it any less uproariously fun!! For a movie to actually find unique ground in a hugely crowded and mainstream genre, I say bravo to them and I liked it a lot.Tommy Lee Jones is a sort of brooding, uptight, and very methodical man. He is set in his ways and reserved in what he discusses. He is terrific in the role and at first he comes across as very unlikable but as the film progresses you begin to understand what has happened to him and to their marriage. Jones is charismatic on screen as he almost always is. Meryl Streep is phenomenal of course as the mild mannered, complacent wife. The two of them together are brilliant and their interaction which is the soul and body of this film make it excellent. Their chemistry together is just very real and you feel the divide between them and feel their eventual reconciliation. Steve Carell plays their intensive marriage counsellor and he does a good job but he is really there in name only and almost anyone could have done the part well. Its a small role and its always fun to see Carell but the part has no depth or development so it could be anyone. Still there is no doubt that he has very good chemistry with Streep and Jones and watching the three of them is simply fun.Director David Frankel has done some truly great fun and touching movies. He knows his way around a good story but honestly this must have been a piece of cake for him with Jones and Streep steering the ship. It is just simple entertainment. Some might find it a little crude but I think others will see honesty and heart in it and you'll giggle and go red a lot and its not something you'll wanna watch with Mom and Dad but its a sweet tale and very entertaining and fans of Streep and Jones will not be disappointed. 8/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-104

ur1697212

title: Sweet, melodramatic, unique and sorta fun! review: Certainly this film is saved by powerhouse couple Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep. That isn't to say its not a good story, it is very well written. I'm just not sure it would have found an audience or the same audience as it did without Jones and Streep. The film tackles some insanely taboo subjects especially from the aspect of a senior couple married more than 30 years. It has its funny moment, its awkward moments and certainly its dramatic moments. It would be one film that would be very hard to watch in mixed company given the subject matter but that doesn't make it any less uproariously fun!! For a movie to actually find unique ground in a hugely crowded and mainstream genre, I say bravo to them and I liked it a lot.Tommy Lee Jones is a sort of brooding, uptight, and very methodical man. He is set in his ways and reserved in what he discusses. He is terrific in the role and at first he comes across as very unlikable but as the film progresses you begin to understand what has happened to him and to their marriage. Jones is charismatic on screen as he almost always is. Meryl Streep is phenomenal of course as the mild mannered, complacent wife. The two of them together are brilliant and their interaction which is the soul and body of this film make it excellent. Their chemistry together is just very real and you feel the divide between them and feel their eventual reconciliation. Steve Carell plays their intensive marriage counsellor and he does a good job but he is really there in name only and almost anyone could have done the part well. Its a small role and its always fun to see Carell but the part has no depth or development so it could be anyone. Still there is no doubt that he has very good chemistry with Streep and Jones and watching the three of them is simply fun.Director David Frankel has done some truly great fun and touching movies. He knows his way around a good story but honestly this must have been a piece of cake for him with Jones and Streep steering the ship. It is just simple entertainment. Some might find it a little crude but I think others will see honesty and heart in it and you'll giggle and go red a lot and its not something you'll wanna watch with Mom and Dad but its a sweet tale and very entertaining and fans of Streep and Jones will not be disappointed. 8/10

Good, But Could Have Been Better!

tt1535438

First off, Hope Springs is not the great film it could have been or was suggested by the trailers so I was a bit disappointed by that. That being that, this was still a pretty good movie that I'm sure is relatable to older married couples as this film delves pretty deep into mature themes such as sex life entering old age. Me being a young guy, I thought I would be turned off but actually it didn't do that so much. There are several funny scenes here, but I would label this film more of a drama than a comedy because that's what it is.David Frankel, who directed the magnificent "Devil Wears Prada," is back at it again here in Hope Springs. After thirty years of marriage, Kay and Arnold begin to realize their marriage has been drifting apart. Kay, much to Arnold's displeasure, contacts a well-known sex therapist to help them renew the strength in their marriage.This movie is all about the showdown between two of the greatest actors of anyone's generation: Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones. Honestly, I did not dig Streep's performance as I thought I would. She's not awful, but not great either. Jones is just utterly amazing. No matter what genre he does, he goes above and beyond and once again shows that here. Steve Carell does a pretty good job in his dramatic role, though I thought he would be somewhat funnier.Overall, this is just a good film, but nothing special. It may be a good date night movie or a film older couples will like to watch. Personally, I liked it but to a certain degree. My high score only comes from Tommy Lee Jones who I just plain love as an actor. I rate this film 8/10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-173

ur17646017

title: Good, But Could Have Been Better! review: First off, Hope Springs is not the great film it could have been or was suggested by the trailers so I was a bit disappointed by that. That being that, this was still a pretty good movie that I'm sure is relatable to older married couples as this film delves pretty deep into mature themes such as sex life entering old age. Me being a young guy, I thought I would be turned off but actually it didn't do that so much. There are several funny scenes here, but I would label this film more of a drama than a comedy because that's what it is.David Frankel, who directed the magnificent "Devil Wears Prada," is back at it again here in Hope Springs. After thirty years of marriage, Kay and Arnold begin to realize their marriage has been drifting apart. Kay, much to Arnold's displeasure, contacts a well-known sex therapist to help them renew the strength in their marriage.This movie is all about the showdown between two of the greatest actors of anyone's generation: Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones. Honestly, I did not dig Streep's performance as I thought I would. She's not awful, but not great either. Jones is just utterly amazing. No matter what genre he does, he goes above and beyond and once again shows that here. Steve Carell does a pretty good job in his dramatic role, though I thought he would be somewhat funnier.Overall, this is just a good film, but nothing special. It may be a good date night movie or a film older couples will like to watch. Personally, I liked it but to a certain degree. My high score only comes from Tommy Lee Jones who I just plain love as an actor. I rate this film 8/10.

a good drama - with compelling, three-dimensional characters and a story with an arc and conflict? Hollywood, thanks!

tt1535438

This was a nice little surprise, which perhaps says more about a sad state of affairs in Hollywood as much or more than the film itself. Hope Springs looks at a married couple in their late 50's/early 60's (people aged around Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep's age, whatever it is their characters have been together for 30 years) who have come apart. This is more the opinion of Kay (Streep) than Arnold (Jones), the former feels no affection for her rather typical/boring/curmudgeon husband who works a whatever-accounting job and comes home, watches golf on TV (falling asleep optional) and that's it. Kay may be older, but she's not dead - certainly not romantically or sexually - and she feels it upon her to try and save the marriage, so she gets plane tickets and reservations to go to a counselor for relationships (Steve Carell as host) in Maine. Of course Arnold, old sod he is, doesn't go for it... until Kay is on the plane, and he gets on as well.David Frankel, the director, knows something simple, actually two things, to make his film work (and maybe a smaller but significant one he doesn't, but more on that later): trust the integrity of the script with these characters, and just these characters (they have kids but they're marginal to the story), and trust the actors. In this case two major, Oscar-winning people like Jones and Streep, who seem likely and also unlikely as a couple on screen. Which, actually, is what makes it work. They've been together so long they know each other's beats, what they sound like, attitudes, etc, it's just that there's a differing attitude in terms of emotion and connection. This is what Streep and Jones latch on to, and it's great fun and dramatically satisfying to see them go at it.And the characters work because while Arnold is certainly at fault in the marriage, for the lack of attention he pays, physically and mentally (mostly physically - just touching her and a hug is discomfiting at first), but Kay too isn't let off the hook. She has issues as well, with passive-aggressive tendencies, of not giving the impression to Arnold that there is something to care about (or that's what is known in one of the theatrically juicy therapy sessions with Carell), and Streep knows to play this self-conflict as well. What ends up happening with these characters is that it becomes like the cinematic equivalent of one of those stories from Lady's Home Journal: Can This Marriage Be Saved? Maybe, who knows? Is it more than just a hug or a kiss, or sex, or oral sex, or some kind of other fantasy?The trailer for the film would give the impression it's more about the wackiness that ensues as this older couple tries to 'get it on' as it were (i.e. Something's Gotta Give, It's Complicated, sadly inferior to this one but also starring good actors, including Streep). It's not so much really; it's like a less ambitious Scenes from a Marriage (or, to get snobby here, Saraband?) where it's just about these people, and what we as the audience may see in others we know, or even ourselves, and can reflect on that. And the biggest surprise of all for me was Jones, who for years has been playing gruff, tough-guy roles and/or sheriffs and cops - perhaps with the territory as the Marshall from the Fugitive - however he is incredible playing a simple-but-complex husband with romance issues. Tommy Lee Jones as the drama/romance lead? Yes, it does work, especially as the film builds to its tough climax in the last third about what will happen with these two?Frankel gets so much right as director that I wish I could've gone further to love the film. But for as competent he is technically and as solid he is with the actors... the music, man, the music. Too often songs intrude that shouldn't be there at all or tonally is just off. It drags the audience out, or, worse, it gives the wrong note emotionally to tell us what to feel. With such a script, why bother? 7.5/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-57

ur0453068

title: a good drama - with compelling, three-dimensional characters and a story with an arc and conflict? Hollywood, thanks! review: This was a nice little surprise, which perhaps says more about a sad state of affairs in Hollywood as much or more than the film itself. Hope Springs looks at a married couple in their late 50's/early 60's (people aged around Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep's age, whatever it is their characters have been together for 30 years) who have come apart. This is more the opinion of Kay (Streep) than Arnold (Jones), the former feels no affection for her rather typical/boring/curmudgeon husband who works a whatever-accounting job and comes home, watches golf on TV (falling asleep optional) and that's it. Kay may be older, but she's not dead - certainly not romantically or sexually - and she feels it upon her to try and save the marriage, so she gets plane tickets and reservations to go to a counselor for relationships (Steve Carell as host) in Maine. Of course Arnold, old sod he is, doesn't go for it... until Kay is on the plane, and he gets on as well.David Frankel, the director, knows something simple, actually two things, to make his film work (and maybe a smaller but significant one he doesn't, but more on that later): trust the integrity of the script with these characters, and just these characters (they have kids but they're marginal to the story), and trust the actors. In this case two major, Oscar-winning people like Jones and Streep, who seem likely and also unlikely as a couple on screen. Which, actually, is what makes it work. They've been together so long they know each other's beats, what they sound like, attitudes, etc, it's just that there's a differing attitude in terms of emotion and connection. This is what Streep and Jones latch on to, and it's great fun and dramatically satisfying to see them go at it.And the characters work because while Arnold is certainly at fault in the marriage, for the lack of attention he pays, physically and mentally (mostly physically - just touching her and a hug is discomfiting at first), but Kay too isn't let off the hook. She has issues as well, with passive-aggressive tendencies, of not giving the impression to Arnold that there is something to care about (or that's what is known in one of the theatrically juicy therapy sessions with Carell), and Streep knows to play this self-conflict as well. What ends up happening with these characters is that it becomes like the cinematic equivalent of one of those stories from Lady's Home Journal: Can This Marriage Be Saved? Maybe, who knows? Is it more than just a hug or a kiss, or sex, or oral sex, or some kind of other fantasy?The trailer for the film would give the impression it's more about the wackiness that ensues as this older couple tries to 'get it on' as it were (i.e. Something's Gotta Give, It's Complicated, sadly inferior to this one but also starring good actors, including Streep). It's not so much really; it's like a less ambitious Scenes from a Marriage (or, to get snobby here, Saraband?) where it's just about these people, and what we as the audience may see in others we know, or even ourselves, and can reflect on that. And the biggest surprise of all for me was Jones, who for years has been playing gruff, tough-guy roles and/or sheriffs and cops - perhaps with the territory as the Marshall from the Fugitive - however he is incredible playing a simple-but-complex husband with romance issues. Tommy Lee Jones as the drama/romance lead? Yes, it does work, especially as the film builds to its tough climax in the last third about what will happen with these two?Frankel gets so much right as director that I wish I could've gone further to love the film. But for as competent he is technically and as solid he is with the actors... the music, man, the music. Too often songs intrude that shouldn't be there at all or tonally is just off. It drags the audience out, or, worse, it gives the wrong note emotionally to tell us what to feel. With such a script, why bother? 7.5/10

A Nutshell Review: Hope Springs

tt1535438

This is for married folks who are suffering from the mundane having crept into their lives, sapping away energy and everything that had made it tick, and resigned to settling for what it is rather than what it can be. Directed by David Frankel, probably better known for his The Devil Wears Prada film, Hope Springs has a touch of sensitivity and emotions stemming very much from a female point of view, after all it's written by one in Vanessa Taylor, and it's full of poignant moments that makes it quite the romantic drama, even if it's dealing with relationship, and matrimonial issues and challenges.Given that it's an American production, things like seeing a therapist, and enrolling in counselling sessions seem to be almost second nature, and rather focused on physical and emotional intimacy for the most parts. Which is excellent to bring on the laughs especially when the couple have to open up their most intimate secrets and fantasies, goaded to play them out where possible as exercises. There's heavy emotional investment in having the couple square off, and deal with the problems and perception faced by the other, with most of the issues having been swept under the carpet, but not any more when they are now brought out onto the negotiating table in very painful, but honest terms.I suppose those who have been through 30 over years of marriage may attest to some of the issues brought up, and in relationships that aren't rock solid to begin with, or have wavered over the years jointed only by the sense of obligation and having romance largely absent, it's trouble with a capital T. For Kay (Meryl Streep) and Arnold (Tommy Lee Jones), married life has become a routine, and dictated by television programs ending in different rooms to retire for the night. Anniversaries boil down to getting the latest cable programs, until Kay decides that enough is enough, and is inspired to seek help, very much against Arnold's wishes, from a guru in Maine that costs a few thousand dollars for an intensive one week course that can get their marriage back on track again.The delight here is of course Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones. Streep is excellent as the matronly middle aged woman who decided to put her foot down and take charge of her life, and many a times Streep has her very subtle skills making Kay very three dimensional, and believable as the woman who is really sounding out for help, and wearing her depressing emotions on her sleeves. The slightest of smiles told a whole of more than dialogue ever could. And Tommy Lee Jones shone as the grumpy, skeptical old man who just hated to be where his wife dragged him to, trying his best to compromise but almost always losing it given that most men probably would, when questions come point blank at the ego.Perhaps the only blemish would be Steve Carell, unfortunately. No offense though as he's one of my favourite comedians, and personally I'd prefer his more dramatic roles, but as the therapist Dr. Feld, he cannot do any more justice to a really bland character that's written to be as such, as if to out-bland the blandness in the marriage of the couples in his life's calling, to heal and mend deep wounds and scars that exist, making them realize what matters more in each other, and to help them find a way back to the good old romantic moments, even up to what made them fall in love all over again. Delivering questions in a monotone voice, and always ending his questions with a forced smile, it's pretty amazing Dr Felds can become quite the talk of the town and sustaining all industries as well.Still, the nuances shown by Streep and Lee Jones in their roles are what made Hope Springs well worth to sit right through, without any need to dwell on the melodramatic and the woes of a long married couple. It's funny without being rude nor vulgar, and shows that the veterans together can rescue a very straightforward narrative, making it interesting just by the sheer force of their acting capabilities alone. A definite recommendation!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-67

ur0317399

title: A Nutshell Review: Hope Springs review: This is for married folks who are suffering from the mundane having crept into their lives, sapping away energy and everything that had made it tick, and resigned to settling for what it is rather than what it can be. Directed by David Frankel, probably better known for his The Devil Wears Prada film, Hope Springs has a touch of sensitivity and emotions stemming very much from a female point of view, after all it's written by one in Vanessa Taylor, and it's full of poignant moments that makes it quite the romantic drama, even if it's dealing with relationship, and matrimonial issues and challenges.Given that it's an American production, things like seeing a therapist, and enrolling in counselling sessions seem to be almost second nature, and rather focused on physical and emotional intimacy for the most parts. Which is excellent to bring on the laughs especially when the couple have to open up their most intimate secrets and fantasies, goaded to play them out where possible as exercises. There's heavy emotional investment in having the couple square off, and deal with the problems and perception faced by the other, with most of the issues having been swept under the carpet, but not any more when they are now brought out onto the negotiating table in very painful, but honest terms.I suppose those who have been through 30 over years of marriage may attest to some of the issues brought up, and in relationships that aren't rock solid to begin with, or have wavered over the years jointed only by the sense of obligation and having romance largely absent, it's trouble with a capital T. For Kay (Meryl Streep) and Arnold (Tommy Lee Jones), married life has become a routine, and dictated by television programs ending in different rooms to retire for the night. Anniversaries boil down to getting the latest cable programs, until Kay decides that enough is enough, and is inspired to seek help, very much against Arnold's wishes, from a guru in Maine that costs a few thousand dollars for an intensive one week course that can get their marriage back on track again.The delight here is of course Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones. Streep is excellent as the matronly middle aged woman who decided to put her foot down and take charge of her life, and many a times Streep has her very subtle skills making Kay very three dimensional, and believable as the woman who is really sounding out for help, and wearing her depressing emotions on her sleeves. The slightest of smiles told a whole of more than dialogue ever could. And Tommy Lee Jones shone as the grumpy, skeptical old man who just hated to be where his wife dragged him to, trying his best to compromise but almost always losing it given that most men probably would, when questions come point blank at the ego.Perhaps the only blemish would be Steve Carell, unfortunately. No offense though as he's one of my favourite comedians, and personally I'd prefer his more dramatic roles, but as the therapist Dr. Feld, he cannot do any more justice to a really bland character that's written to be as such, as if to out-bland the blandness in the marriage of the couples in his life's calling, to heal and mend deep wounds and scars that exist, making them realize what matters more in each other, and to help them find a way back to the good old romantic moments, even up to what made them fall in love all over again. Delivering questions in a monotone voice, and always ending his questions with a forced smile, it's pretty amazing Dr Felds can become quite the talk of the town and sustaining all industries as well.Still, the nuances shown by Streep and Lee Jones in their roles are what made Hope Springs well worth to sit right through, without any need to dwell on the melodramatic and the woes of a long married couple. It's funny without being rude nor vulgar, and shows that the veterans together can rescue a very straightforward narrative, making it interesting just by the sheer force of their acting capabilities alone. A definite recommendation!

This Hope Springs A Leak **1/2

tt1535438

I was expecting that by the end of the film, they would be playing You Were Meant for Me in the background.We're subjected to a married couple of 30+ years who are encountering sexual and other emotional issues in their marriage.To the film's benefit, the couple are Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones. Jones is perfect for the part. He looks like he is in a post-mid-life crisis and as for Streep, she can chew into any material given to her.Steve Carell, as the sex-therapist is the highlight of the film to me. He sits there and speaks as if he coming directly from a textbook. He displays little emotions and is constantly giving advice on how to improve the marriage; although, he admits that he has counseled people on how to end a marriage as well.Perhaps, one has to be married to appreciate this.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535438/reviews-150

ur2542703

title: This Hope Springs A Leak **1/2 review: I was expecting that by the end of the film, they would be playing You Were Meant for Me in the background.We're subjected to a married couple of 30+ years who are encountering sexual and other emotional issues in their marriage.To the film's benefit, the couple are Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones. Jones is perfect for the part. He looks like he is in a post-mid-life crisis and as for Streep, she can chew into any material given to her.Steve Carell, as the sex-therapist is the highlight of the film to me. He sits there and speaks as if he coming directly from a textbook. He displays little emotions and is constantly giving advice on how to improve the marriage; although, he admits that he has counseled people on how to end a marriage as well.Perhaps, one has to be married to appreciate this.

Typical Bergman

tt0050986

An old professor reflects on his life. This is a typical Bergman film in that it touches on big themes like love, marriage, death, and God. The handling of these themes is not as heavy handed as in "The Seventh Seal," although the symbolism is too obvious (handless clock = death). Sjostrom is quite good as the professor. Thulin is also fine as his daughter-in-law. Andersson is lovely as the cousin he loved as a young man and regrets not marrying. Apparently in Sweden it is socially acceptable to marry one's cousin. A contrived plot device has Andersson also playing a young woman by the same name as the professor's cousin that he happens to meet in old age, a lazy metaphor for lost youth.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050986/reviews-124

ur2590596

title: Typical Bergman review: An old professor reflects on his life. This is a typical Bergman film in that it touches on big themes like love, marriage, death, and God. The handling of these themes is not as heavy handed as in "The Seventh Seal," although the symbolism is too obvious (handless clock = death). Sjostrom is quite good as the professor. Thulin is also fine as his daughter-in-law. Andersson is lovely as the cousin he loved as a young man and regrets not marrying. Apparently in Sweden it is socially acceptable to marry one's cousin. A contrived plot device has Andersson also playing a young woman by the same name as the professor's cousin that he happens to meet in old age, a lazy metaphor for lost youth.

An uplifting movie about one man's redemption.

tt0050986

Wild Strawberries is about a man who led a life marked by coldness, he is therefore forced to confront the emptiness of his existence that has haunted him. Wild Strawberries is about of a man's journey from isolation and coldness to a resurge in his life, Wild Strawberries is just a beautiful movie with some valuable lessons. Victor Sjostrom plays Professor Isak Borg whose has led a life of isolation. The entirety of the movie takes place in a day with flashbacks of the life that he has led. He is on the way to receive a degree from the University of Lund. The movie is essentially about viewing the life you have led and realizing that it is never too late to change your ways. Bibi Andersson plays Sara a cousin he was to marry. Borg dreams about visiting the Sara from his dreams while out picking strawberries. Borg's brother gropes Sara and this breaks Borg's heart. The whole movie is full of hidden metaphors and subtext about regrets and happiness in life that everyone experiences. The beautiful Ingrid Thulin plays Mariana, the wife of Borg's son who travels with Borg to Lund. She initially has hatred and bitterness towards Borg but eventually gets to like him; this is an uplifting sub-plot in the duration of the movie. I believe that the message that Bergman was trying to convey is done so very well in this film in that it make us feel the many different and various feelings that are portrayed in the movie such as forgiveness. Wild Strawberries is yet another masterpiece from Ingmar Bergman that is told in such a uplifting and beautiful manner.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050986/reviews-151

ur26897720

title: An uplifting movie about one man's redemption. review: Wild Strawberries is about a man who led a life marked by coldness, he is therefore forced to confront the emptiness of his existence that has haunted him. Wild Strawberries is about of a man's journey from isolation and coldness to a resurge in his life, Wild Strawberries is just a beautiful movie with some valuable lessons. Victor Sjostrom plays Professor Isak Borg whose has led a life of isolation. The entirety of the movie takes place in a day with flashbacks of the life that he has led. He is on the way to receive a degree from the University of Lund. The movie is essentially about viewing the life you have led and realizing that it is never too late to change your ways. Bibi Andersson plays Sara a cousin he was to marry. Borg dreams about visiting the Sara from his dreams while out picking strawberries. Borg's brother gropes Sara and this breaks Borg's heart. The whole movie is full of hidden metaphors and subtext about regrets and happiness in life that everyone experiences. The beautiful Ingrid Thulin plays Mariana, the wife of Borg's son who travels with Borg to Lund. She initially has hatred and bitterness towards Borg but eventually gets to like him; this is an uplifting sub-plot in the duration of the movie. I believe that the message that Bergman was trying to convey is done so very well in this film in that it make us feel the many different and various feelings that are portrayed in the movie such as forgiveness. Wild Strawberries is yet another masterpiece from Ingmar Bergman that is told in such a uplifting and beautiful manner.

Emotional and symbolic masterpiece by the genius Ingmar Berman

tt0050986

¨ Wild strawberries¨ is a spellbinding masterpiece by the great Ingmar Bergman with brilliant acting by Victor Sjostrom (Sweden first movie filmmaker and star , best known for his silent work , who died three years later , aged 81) and awesome cinematography by Gunnar Fischer ; showing a rich tapestry of fears , dreams , anxieties , memories and occasionally over-symbolic frames . This Bergman's landmark film is developed in Sweden , after living a life marked by coldness, an aging professor is forced to confront the emptiness of his existence , taking place a sentimental voyage . This the story about an aging scientist on the rout to accept a prize and he must come to terms with nightmares , surrealist dreams and guilt .The movie displays haunting and powerful scenes ,it's plenty of intellectual images which stay forever in the mind ; resulting to be one of Bergman's warmest and therefore finest movies . Brooding and thought-provoking screenplay , Ingmar Bergman wrote the script while he was in hospital and thought the movie with Victor Sjöström in mind and riddled with a real feeling the joys of youth , age and nature . Although sometimes is slow moving ,however the thoughtful screenplay is narrated with intelligence and sensitivity but are developed ethics and moral issues as death , God , religion , family and aging . Surrealist and impressive images as when the coffin falling from the hearse , one of Bergman's own recurring dreams . Victor Sjostrom , Swedish cinema's best known pioneer and in his final screen appearance , gives a surprisingly moving interpretation as a professor on a touching journey to his redemption . The movie is marvelously paced and acted , and realizes an excellent Sweden reunion actors with usual Bergman's players (Ingrid Thulin , Bibi Andersson , Max Von Sidow as a gas station keeper and Gunner Lindblon, among others) , showing the different characters and exploring their apprehensions , ambitions, fears and circumstances . Glimmer and riveting cinematography by Gunner Fischer (The seventh seal) , he's deemed by many to be one of the world's greatest cameraman , he achieved give the movies on the most natural and simplest look imaginable . Cinematographer Gunnar Fischer says that several scenes had to be shot indoors due to Victor Sjöström's poor health , "We had to make some very bad back-projection in the car because we never knew if Victor would come back alive the next day." Gunnar was subsequently replaced by Sven Nykvist (won an Oscar for Fanny and Alexander) as Bergman's cinematographer . ¨Smultronstället¨ is wonderfully directed by Bergman ,it's a real masterpiece who made his major impact gaining international acclaim and winning Gloden Globe 60 , for the best Foreign film . His realization was during an impressive golden period from 1957-1968 when Bergman made stunning masterpieces, plenty of richly observed characters : The seventh seal , Persona, The communicants , The silence , Virgin spring , Hour of wolf . Rating: Magnificent, but is considered by many (along with The seventh seal) to be the Bergman's best .

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050986/reviews-135

ur3270789

title: Emotional and symbolic masterpiece by the genius Ingmar Berman review: ¨ Wild strawberries¨ is a spellbinding masterpiece by the great Ingmar Bergman with brilliant acting by Victor Sjostrom (Sweden first movie filmmaker and star , best known for his silent work , who died three years later , aged 81) and awesome cinematography by Gunnar Fischer ; showing a rich tapestry of fears , dreams , anxieties , memories and occasionally over-symbolic frames . This Bergman's landmark film is developed in Sweden , after living a life marked by coldness, an aging professor is forced to confront the emptiness of his existence , taking place a sentimental voyage . This the story about an aging scientist on the rout to accept a prize and he must come to terms with nightmares , surrealist dreams and guilt .The movie displays haunting and powerful scenes ,it's plenty of intellectual images which stay forever in the mind ; resulting to be one of Bergman's warmest and therefore finest movies . Brooding and thought-provoking screenplay , Ingmar Bergman wrote the script while he was in hospital and thought the movie with Victor Sjöström in mind and riddled with a real feeling the joys of youth , age and nature . Although sometimes is slow moving ,however the thoughtful screenplay is narrated with intelligence and sensitivity but are developed ethics and moral issues as death , God , religion , family and aging . Surrealist and impressive images as when the coffin falling from the hearse , one of Bergman's own recurring dreams . Victor Sjostrom , Swedish cinema's best known pioneer and in his final screen appearance , gives a surprisingly moving interpretation as a professor on a touching journey to his redemption . The movie is marvelously paced and acted , and realizes an excellent Sweden reunion actors with usual Bergman's players (Ingrid Thulin , Bibi Andersson , Max Von Sidow as a gas station keeper and Gunner Lindblon, among others) , showing the different characters and exploring their apprehensions , ambitions, fears and circumstances . Glimmer and riveting cinematography by Gunner Fischer (The seventh seal) , he's deemed by many to be one of the world's greatest cameraman , he achieved give the movies on the most natural and simplest look imaginable . Cinematographer Gunnar Fischer says that several scenes had to be shot indoors due to Victor Sjöström's poor health , "We had to make some very bad back-projection in the car because we never knew if Victor would come back alive the next day." Gunnar was subsequently replaced by Sven Nykvist (won an Oscar for Fanny and Alexander) as Bergman's cinematographer . ¨Smultronstället¨ is wonderfully directed by Bergman ,it's a real masterpiece who made his major impact gaining international acclaim and winning Gloden Globe 60 , for the best Foreign film . His realization was during an impressive golden period from 1957-1968 when Bergman made stunning masterpieces, plenty of richly observed characters : The seventh seal , Persona, The communicants , The silence , Virgin spring , Hour of wolf . Rating: Magnificent, but is considered by many (along with The seventh seal) to be the Bergman's best .

Early fruit

tt0050986

'Wild Strawberries' is a surprisingly accessible Ingmar Bergman film: the story of an aged doctor who is drawn to reflect on what has made him the person that he is. What's interesting is the depth of the psychology here: this movie was made in 1957, and for it's day, the sophistication of the characterisation is quite astonishing, render it in colour and you could easily believe that it dates from decades later. The style, however, is talky, the cast do their job but the whole experience lacks a little of the intensity of Bergman's later work. Nonetheless, it's a shrewd insight into the nature personality, and ahead of it's time.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050986/reviews-101

ur2082018

title: Early fruit review: 'Wild Strawberries' is a surprisingly accessible Ingmar Bergman film: the story of an aged doctor who is drawn to reflect on what has made him the person that he is. What's interesting is the depth of the psychology here: this movie was made in 1957, and for it's day, the sophistication of the characterisation is quite astonishing, render it in colour and you could easily believe that it dates from decades later. The style, however, is talky, the cast do their job but the whole experience lacks a little of the intensity of Bergman's later work. Nonetheless, it's a shrewd insight into the nature personality, and ahead of it's time.