So, how is the Constant Gardner? (Fernando Meirelles, dir. of city of god)
 

Story looks great and its from the director of City of God, so i'm there no matter what. I was just wondering if its as good as early reviews have pointed out.
its got a 90% rating on rotten tomatoes.

release date is tomorrow, and its currently got a 81% rating on rotten tomatoes.

crap, nevermind, its release date is 8/30

More importantly, does Rachel Weisz get nekkid? :rock:

apparently (got this from imdb, and contains a possible spoiler

Yes, there's a scene like this. The pregnant material is amazingly seamless. Very impressive work.

I would rate City of God as a 10/10, and this would get a 9/10. Very very good film.

Why spoil that? You can see it in the trailer. :confused:

Rachel + Pregnant = Giantrobo > :)

Did you feel at all that the camerawork was a little out of control? That it took you out of the film?

Saw this recently. Good movie when I reflect upon it. I must admit that while it has nothing to do with the plot of the movie or its story, it helped seeing City of God
beforehand, as the style is practically the same. Great performances from Fiennes and Weisz, though I could have done without looking at her bare butt.

I thought it was great.

Great.

So nice to have a film, especially at this time of year, that doesn't assume the audience is stupid.

Great film. I walked out of the theatre thankful the film didn't treat me like an idiot.

And Rachel Weisz doesan incredible job. Best I've seen her in.

It's incredible, a film that assumes its audience has 1.) Seen a map and 2.) can locate Africa on it.

I thought it took a tired old plot: and did next to nothing with it. Good acting and intelligent in its politically correct way, but it near bored me to death. I had been very much looking forward to it. Very disappointing.

**/****

If one wants to see a great film about a real African tragedy I recommend Hotel Rwanda.



It drove me nuts. I could see no reason to use hand-held cameras (which seemed to be deliberately shaken even more than would be done naturally) other than to appear "artsy' or to give it a documentary feel which I think was totally unnecessary for this material. It constantly took me out of the film.

Edit: After seeing the film last week I wanted to post my thoughts but couldn't find a thread and didn't want to start one. Silly me, I searched under "Constant Gardener," not "Constant Gardner." :lol:

I thought that was a very good film, but I thought Gardener was miles better. HR suffered from oversentimental sap that would make even Spielberg cringe.

very "good" movie, great acting.... but in the end, it was a little over the top, drama-wise, and I wouldn't recommend it most. I kinda know what I was getting into, when I saw it had Ralph Fiennes heheh.

is this really the most recent thread?

this was such a fantastic, knock you on your ass movie that captivated me. Ralph was just so good. finishing what she couldn't...he showed such a palette of emotion right down to the dramatic end. he was utterly amazing!

as much as i love Terrance Howard, i think he got Ralph's spot this year in Best Actor. i thought "Hustle and Flow" was very good, but not great and i think his nom was more based on "Crash" in which he was amazing, but that would be supporting and i htink he should have gotten nom'd in that over any, especially William Hurt. therefore if TH was nom'd in support, Ralph would have been nom'd in best. but, that is just me.

Ralph didn't really get nods for any of the major awards outisde Britian (GG, SAG, etc...), so deserving or not, I doubt he would have gotten Howard's spot. Russell Crowe would have been my guess for next in line.

Just caught this last night. Great movie, but during a couple scenes the shaky camera was just very, very un-necessary. This is the type of film you want to watch again right away, to see what you missed the first time. Overall, I'd give it an 8 or 9 outta 10. Both Rachel Weisz and Fiennes deserve some kind of nod for this film, they were both terrific.

Question for anyone who watched it:

No.

I watched this last night. Very good. A little too slow in places and definitely a one time viewing for me, but still was an extremely well done film. Fiennes was great. Weisz I didn't get the hype or why she got the oscar.

Just saw it on DVD, very good movie and the director did a great job of filming. Certainly not as jumpy as City of God was.

Very good movie, definately worth a rental.

Great movie? Yes. Somber, knock your socks off political thriller with terrific performances. :thumbsup:

Replay value? Probably low - not certain. Left the theater feeling like it might not garnish many more viewings. Worth a rental.

I agree. Just because the movie had a political message it was a good performance? That's like giving an Oscar to Crash. :rolleyes:

I really liked this movie (really good acting, good story line and characters, etc.), but I thought it had one major flaw . . . it wasn't a true story. In the end it seemed a little hollow to me that any emotion that I felt during the movie was against something/somebody that didn't exist and never really happened. Part of the point of the film was obviously (to me anyway) to get people worked up and inspire them to go out and make a difference over the injustices that you see . . . but since they are made up, it kind of leaves you at a loss as to how you would get connected in if you wanted to.

Hope that made sense . . . :D

I liked Hotel Rwanda a lot, as well, but see Donnacha's point. If you want an even better version of that story (and, therefore, an even greater "film about a real African tragedy" ;) ), check out Sometimes In April . . . very powerful. :up: x 2

I agree. It's a weird dynamic when watching a film of political fiction.