Supermallet

I did a search for this but didn't find a thread dedicated solely to it. If I'm wrong then just post a link in here to that thread and we'll call it a day.

I just saw this, and thought it was fantastic. I wasn't sure what to make of it from the trailers, which made it look like a melodrama or a thriller, or a melodramatic thriller. Instead, I found an intelligent, well-acted, emotionally involving drama. It avoided so many cliches and potential pitfalls. I thought all the actors were fantastic, with both Connelly and Kingsley standing out. I wasn't initially so hot with but after seeing the events that followed, it made sense to me. It played out like a well-tuned tragedy, and I thought it was one of the best films of the year.

Hendrik

Good for you!

. . . . . .

Patman

This film sidesteps many generic cliches in a film about a woman who loses her house by a clerical mistake with the local government, which results in it being auctioned off, and the buyer is an Iranian who has profits in his eyes as he picks up the distressed property for a song. What unfolds is pretty moving, as the search for cultural identity (by the Iranian family) and social identity (Jennifer Connelly's Kathy who has been beset with personal turmoil) meet head-on at different angles which impacts all involved in a final act that makes it very compelling to watch to its conclusion. The direction (by a first-timer Vadim Perelman) is very effective, especially in the final act, where restraint is on display, but it's done deftly and assuredly.

The film's trailer is pretty bad considering what the film is really about, and should not dissaude people from seeing the film.

Ben Kingsley is absolutely stunning in this film (I'm hoping he gets an Oscar nod for his work here). Jennifer Connelly's only shortcoming in the film is that she's just too damn good-looking, even when she's supposed to be down and out, she's still gorgeous to look at, and it's hard to imagine her to be the mess she is in the film. But, still, she's very effective in conveying a woman adrift in her life's woes. Ron Eldard's performance is good as the kind-hearted Sheriff who helps out Kathy, but it's not outstanding, and nowhere in Kingsley's league.

I give it 3.5 stars, or a grade of B+.

slateef

for heaven's sake patman, have you ever heard of SPOILER tags???

thanks for nothin'...

Supermallet

Um, almost everything Patman said is shown in the trailer. What's your beef? I can tell you, he does not give away anything.

Patman

I write all of my reviews with the caveat that a film's trailer/preview content are fairgame to be mentioned, but I do my best not to give anything away in terms of resolution (or I spoilerize it). I haven't ruined the film for anyone who read my review, anymore than someone who saw the trailer for it.

theneobez

That didn't seem to spoil anything at all.

Anyways, a question out of curiousity, is there alot of Farsi spoken in the film?

Ignite

Personally I thought the movie was fantastic, but I think Ron Eldard's character was horrible in the movie. Some of the completely illogical choices he makes in the movie are just too much... That or maybe they just didn't develop the character well enough.

Patman

BTW, it looks like Jennifer got most of her boobage back.

RyoHazuki

Thank God. She looked way too skinny in Hulk.

rkndkn

I rather agree with you, Ignite.

Supermallet

Yes, he acted irrationally, but the story did need it, and besides, looking at Jennifer Connelly, who stays rational? I thought Eldard's performance gave him enough of a human touch that while I may not have agreed with his decisions, I did understand them.

cdollaz

I saw this and is was more like House Of Boredom and Slumber for me. I thought it would never end.

Gunshy

(can't believe I'm first to say this)

Pics?

I mean really, even if they aren't from this film, can a thread have too many J.C. pics can it?

-Gunshy

CUBuffsMike41

I went to see this yesterday and definitely agree. I think JC had a pretty stellar performance, but it didn't help. First, it would have helped I guess those are just minor, unimportant details that really annoyed me since the movie sucked anyway.

I think if a movie is going to try and tackle these relationship and hardship issues, the characters and plot should be a little less contrived.

Pants

Nearly everything you've said is wrong and you clearly weren't paying attention: It was made pretty clear that they fled Iran and were living off their quickly dwindling fortune. The father had to work 2 jobs to keep them in the black. A proud Iranian father who wants his daughter married to a good family and who wants to look good to his peers is going to spend lavishly on a wedding even if he doesn't have the money.

Did Ben Kingsly's character seem to you to be the kind of guy who would ask for help? He's too proud. Also his ellitest inlaws would think their son married a woman from a poor family. Were you in the bathroom when the inlaws vistited and were disgusted by the condition of the home?

She was a cleaning lady. They actually dedicated an entire scene after her eviction showing her at work vacuming a family's home. You sure went to the bathroom a lot?

Exactly. Slime ball move from a slime ball character. It's the first reason we have to suspect his true intentions.

The whole point is that we don't know what to make of the guy. He is AMBIGUOUS. Ambiguity is at the heart of the thriller/suspense genre. All the characters in this film are given ambiguous traits so that the audience's expectations of the character are always uncertain.

Yeah like Norman Bates in that stupid movie Psycho. First he seems benign then he's a killer then back to mister nice guy, what's up with that?

Not a big deal didn't bother me.

But here is where you really blow my mind. You fundementally missunderstood the entire premise of the film. He bought the house at government auction for a rediculously low sum. That's what the government does with ceased property. That guy with the orange rolling measurer...that was an appraiser. The property appraised at 157K that's what it was REALLY WORTH! The goverment unloaded it below market value at public auction.

Bottom line is it's fine if you didn't like the movie, and I'm glad you shared your reasons for disliking it (that's more than some troll posters on this board ever do) but it seems you fundamentally missunderstood several things about this film, and I suggest you watch it again.

Supermallet

Pants, I agree with all your points. Connelly's character was evicted because she didn't pay $500 in taxes (that she didn't really owe, anyway). All the government wanted was $500. Beyond that, anything else was extra. THAT is why Kingsley's character got the property for so low.

Liver&Onions

Well, I must chime in and say that it's worth it to read the book...even if it was recommended by Oprah. Movies cannot display properly the inner turmoil that these characters have, and the book will shed some enlightenment to what is on screen.

Patman

Wasn't the house appraised for $175,000?

Corvin

Yeah, it was. It could have been a grand less or a grand more, but it was definitely in the 170,000-180,000 range.

This struck me as dirt cheap for a beach house, regardless. Is this really the price houses are going for near San Fran? And near the ocean, no less. I had always imagined numbers much, much larger.

Anyway, I thought the movie was pretty decent. Well acted, particularly by Jennifer Connelly and Ben Kingsley (no surprises there, I guess). Some great camera work, as well. The reoccuring shot of the bird bath was particularly cool. Anyway, nothing was really jaw dropping aside from the performances. Ben Kingsley should definitely earn a nod for this one.

Zodiac_Speaking

A powerful drama, "B+", for sure. As noted a hundred times before, killer acting from Kingsley and JC. I never heard or read the book, but went to see it due to the praise, the Oscar nods, and the interesting premise-glad I did. The "bleakest ending to a film in 2003" that EW said, I really got a kick out of. It was a glooming and cold day here in Omaha, NE, and some people said after the show: "Well, that was different" and "No wonder people aren't in a nice mood"-funny to hear that.

Corvin

Anyway. . .

movieking

I thought that this was a great movie. Connolly and Kingsley were superb. Wouldn't be surprised if they get some Oscar nods...

The Nature Boy

First off, Pants, you should go back and edit your post to put spoiler marks on it.

Anyway, talk about a movie built on sand. Ben Kingsley gives a respectable, game, B.K. performance, nothing above what he's done lately. But I don't get this crowning of him with an Oscar for his rather pedestrian role. But I can definately see him not even being nominated, behind Cruise, Crowe, Murrary, Penn, Law, Nicholson, etc. But that's neither here nor there, he was quite good, just a bit overrated. As for the film...



God I could go on, but I scarcely see the point. Yes, if there were no errors in judgement or mistakes by the lead or supporting characters, you scarcely have a film, it's the nature of the beast. But stupidity should not likewise be a cure all for when a writer or director paints themself in a corner. It's lazy all the way not to establish a perchant or tendency for idiotic choices. And it's certainly not wise to be COMPLETELY reliant on them. Stupidity and luck are nothing to build a film on, never mind the climax. To be outsmarted is one thing, fine, but to be a complete moron, especially at random unpredictable intervals, is not the basis for a film of quality.

Corvin

I'm not trying to tell you what to think, but here are some other ways of seeing the situations.


------

That being said, I don't think this is a great film. I do think it's good enough, though.