Reviews

21 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Realism versus Story-Telling
5 October 2014
As much as I respect and at times love director Anton Corbijn's and author John Le Carré's emphasis on realism, this movie is bogged down by a lack of focus on one story-defining goal, which is rather realistic but makes for a difficult watch.

Before anyone gets mad: I am well aware that this is Philip-Seymour Hoffman's last completed film - which was actually the reason for me to go see it. And he is good. PSH-good. Meaning, by the standards of most other actors he is GREAT, but by PSH-standards its a pretty run-of-the- mill role that does not call for a great performance and Hoffman plays it like that: A neat little movie experience in Germany that came along and that he probably did not take too seriously, obviously not suspecting that it would be his final starring role. And he does well when you compare it to Willem Dafoe's performance, which he apparently took very seriously. At times Dafoe seems to hinge on the verge of overacting, at least when compared to the other actors and his surroundings.

But the real trouble, as I said, is the story. It starts out as an espionage thriller focusing on the question whether Issa, a Chechen Muslim having entered Germany illegally, has come as a terrorist and is planning on meeting fundamentalists or other radical elements and maybe blow something up. Slowly the focus then shifts without ever clarifying that Bachmann (Hoffman) and his team no longer suspect Issa to be dangerous, but somehow they start acting like they have come to that conclusion. The focus keeps shifting and in the end you realize the movie was about something totally different all along which it didn't stress. Because it is something that Bachmann would have had to stress and he is not the kind of character who goes on tantrums over things, so it is realistic but makes the storyline seem a little crooked.

Add to that that around the middle the team decides for a course of action that seems drastic at first but then ends up slowing the entire movie down a bit. For about ten to twenty minutes the whole premise just seems to float and not go anywhere. I felt bored for a while before the pace picked up again.

As a last concern: Rachel McAdams just doesn't belong here. This is not really a critique of her or her acting talents which are fine. But while everybody else looks like the characters they play, she just looks like a Hollywood starlet who came to spice up an independent movie with some glamor. Which is completely out of place. It doesn't help that we all but never see her character, who is supposed to be a lawyer, do anything lawyerly other than speak to Dafoe's rich banker on her client's behalf. She is just an alien in this world of low-life agents and bureaucrats.

What we end up with is a pretty okay movie with some great photography and interesting themes that are, however, not told all that stringently. But if you came to enjoy Hoffman's last performance, you will get your opportunity to enjoy, even if it isn't his most outstanding work. It still shows that the man was a genius on screen.

By the way: If you see this with someone from Germany, prepare that they start giggling when they see "Michael", a government employee aiding Bachmann: The actor is Herbert Grönemeyer, a well-known and often ridiculed pop-singer in Germany who very rarely acts in movies. Germans are primed to laugh at him trying to act (as few remember his pretty well-done starring role in classic "Das Boot").
95 out of 146 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Barefoot (2005)
8/10
Not flawless, only wonderful...
25 January 2008
You may try to dislike this dramedy. Unless you're really determined you probably won't make it. While some people may be turned off by something or other, most will have to admit that this is actually quite a nice effort from first-time-on-his-own-director and with-some-assistance-producer/writer/editor/star Schweiger. But the worst thing I can say about the movie is that the reduced color scheme didn't appeal to me all that much. Not because it was reduced, but because it made everything look as if the sun was continually setting.

Mostly it is a terribly nice little story with Wokalek's timid performance wonderfully contrasting Schweiger's character's arrogance that turns into love during the course of the movie. The character development actually works and seems pretty believable... Add some very good supporting performances from Michael Mendl, Imogen Kogge, and Steffen Wink and you get a very nice, sweetly romantic and incredibly funny picture. I wish Schweiger had managed to pull off the same trick again with "Keinohrhasen", which was nowhere near as good.

Watch it with the person you love.
16 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Til Schweiger, your writing disappoints me.
11 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Don't get me wrong, Til (and I know you'll be reading this), you're already a very accomplished director. But that script really needed some more work.

Seriously, first you seem to simply forget about some characters (Lolo just disappears. He's still there to be seen, but he doesn't take part in the story anymore and completely forgets about his trademark aggression and unpredictability.), second Anna falls for Ludo pretty suddenly and with very little incentive, third you're using that 'People talking way too loud in restaurants' gag too often, fourth some of the scenes don't make any sense at all (sadly most of them involving Matthias Schweighöfer, who is a great actor but his character just doesn't have enough to do here and has some scenes instead that don't seem to serve any purpose), fifth - where did that between Moritz and Miriam come from? That was really underdeveloped. Sixth: Armin Rohdes whole character is just one big stereotype (the douche bag acting as clown for kids). But most of all (here come the spoilers):

The third Act breaks down completely. I still go along with Jürgen picking up Anna in the park out of sympathy. But then she, who showed us some really beautiful dresses earlier in the movie, doesn't change for a red carpet event?!? While Jürgen does? And she doesn't look too uncomfortable with this? Admit it, you threw out a scene here that would have explained this, right? And the climax in the theater... Those people made up their minds about not enjoying Ludo as Mucki pretty fast, didn't they? And where did all that fruit come from all of a sudden? I am ready to suspend some disbelief when I go to a movie, but not THAT much. And I was hoping for one last dialog between Jürgen Vogel and Ludo. After all, Jürgen played a really mean trick on him but then let go off the girl for Ludo. I wanted to see some sign of newly found mutual respect between these men, who after all have a little personal history between them. Oh, and I already new the joke from the last scene. Old one. But you directed that very nicely.

So all in all, you get ten stars for the brilliant comedy ("Barfuß", which I LOVED, was even better, but this was very funny, too) but five stars deducted for some awful writing, which I know you can do better. And hope you will do better for your next project, which I am looking forward to.
32 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Good movie-making from an incomplete script.
11 April 2007
"La Cité des enfants perdus" is excellent, imaginative and very accomplished movie-making with an excellent, extremely fitting cast. Still the film leaves a few things to be desired and this is mainly due to a script that almost seems to embrace plot holes.

One's willing compliance with the thieves and Miette's sudden affection for One are never fully explained, at more than one point characters use tiny pieces of evidence to jump to the wildest conclusions and some layers of the story seem oddly disconnected from one another. When you think of the bare-bones story you even realize how the subplot involving the evil Siamese twin sisters was unnecessarily stretched out to cover a wide range of movie without very much consequence other than providing a back story for Miette and setting her up with One. Also there is a brilliantly weird, wonderful climax that just flat out ends the movie, leaving the viewer hanging without a sense that the story, despite completed, has been fully resolved.

I certainly won't brag about all the riddling, fantastic moments (like the dream sequences) that are not very easy to understand. That is actually the movie at its best and most imaginative and should be left to everybody's own interpretation. As I said, the pictures were wonderful and Jeunet triumphs in constructing a dark, menacing world rooted in our own but at the same time completely disconnected, a joyride through the subconscious.

See it for the fun and the wonderful experience. Just be aware that emotionally some of it will pretty much leave you hanging in the air due to an underdeveloped script.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1941 (1979)
9/10
Back in the day's when Spielberg dared to be hilarious
26 May 2006
I am writing this review on the day IMDb's daily poll question is "What is Steven Spielberg's most underrated film?". This one came in surprisingly low, considering how great it actually is. "Great" meaning not that it had a lot of hidden depth (you probably CAN write a treatise or two about paranoia and panic in times of war, as they are portrayed in this film, which is ever more important these days) or oh so much heart (like Spielberg's recent "Terminal" pretended to have) or anything. Fact is, it makes me laugh. An awful lot.

Spielberg just came off the success of "Jaws" and right the first scene plays with the audiences expectations regarding this director everyone was talking about. Once chaos takes hold of the Californian coast line, everything is possible, nothing that could not happen to make the next event more unpredictable, screams, explosions, belly-laughs. Aykroyd is typecast as a know-all sergeant who treats every situation as routine, Williams is delightfully menacing as psychotic "Stretch", Belushi somewhat unfathomable as ultra-macho lunatic "Wild Bill" Kelso. It all comes together to one big ruckus of a movie that turns every other thing upside down and always has me up in tears (of laughter) in the end.

Throw anything you think know about Spielberg today over board. He wouldn't make anything even vaguely approaching this today. He just doesn't dare to make hilarious comedies like he did here. Too sad.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Go Trabi Go (1991)
7/10
A rich and hilarious document of the times
13 February 2006
This is not necessarily the best movie ever made, but it is a very precise look at a weird moment in history. Mankind had been sliced in half for more than 40 years by the Cold War. Suddenly it is all over and some people suddenly feel they have a lot of catching up to do.

I enjoy watching this movie with my friends from East-Germany as they always laugh at the Struutz-family's impossible misadventures, because it reminds them of their first contacts with the west. Like cheeky Jacqueline always getting the upper hand in all her encounters with respect-less and unsuspecting boys from the west. Or Udo Struutz marveling at the beauty of a West-German public toilet. Or Rita Struutz's attempts at communicating with an Italian police officer. And of course the unforgettable Diether Krebs serving up a never ending assortment of "Trabbi"-jokes as a manic, arrogant West-German trucker. These moments reflect upon many "Ossis'" (East-Germans) experiences when they first visited the west after the wall had fallen.

If you look for a document of the times, this is probably the most truthful you will find, although some scenes are pure satiric overstatement and Jacqueline makes an absolutely unnecessary escape from her family at one point just to come up with an unconvincing song, possibly directed at starting a singing career for Claudia Schmutzler, which luckily never really took off.

Stay away if you want to learn German, however! The Struutzes speak in a very, very broad Saxon dialect which sounds very different from "clean" German.
9 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Drei Herren (1998)
9/10
Seamless
3 August 2005
I didn't understand half of this movie, due to the strong dialects of most of the people. But what I got, I loved.

The whole beauty of this film is, how all of it seems to come together seamlessly. The various plot elements just flow together, nearly every gag looks as though it absolutely belongs there. Admittedly, sometimes something gets out of line and there are things that just don't fit in with the rest of the movie, but the way this one just keeps moving until it does reach its destination (or does it?) all just remind you what good writing is all about.

Of course, the story brings Howard Zieff's "The Dream Team" (1989) to mind immediately, and probably that movie was a major inspiration for this one. But the whole point here is, that the titular "Three Gentlemen" do not get stranded in a big city but in a small, isolated village, that they don't strive to recover their lost custodian but don't have any mission at all. They are just stranded and it's the narrow-minded, sometimes uncanny villagers who change their lives as much as they change theirs. And, as almost always with these pictures, we get a clear picture of who should *really* be locked away in an asylum and who not. And there are not-so-hidden statements about wonders and those who either see or ignore them.

Watch it for pure delight.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Delivers... after a while
18 October 2004
If you're just in it for the gore and some cheap thrills, this movie will give you what you want from beginning to end. But if you're looking for more, well, give it some time.

Don't expect any decent dialogue or even remotely believable characters. This is not what a Freddy or Jason movie is about, after all. More precisely, the beginning of the movie looks a lot like it's painting by numbers for teen horror flicks. (This does include naked teenage girls, of course.) After a few stereotyped "characters" have been introduced and taken through a number of absolutely unbelievable situations (Oh, I just found a bloody, twisted mess that used to be my abusive boy-friend. Maybe I ought to go to a party to shake it off!) Freddy notices, there are things he doesn't exactly like about his henchman Jason. This is, when the movie finally gets going.

The final is very tense and very packed with action as Freddy and Jason get their ultimate face off. You will not have any trouble to take sides, though, as Jason comes across as a misunderstood Karloff kind of Frankenstein's monster with a big knife during the end. It is still utterly ill-conceived, badly written and unchallengingly acted. But director Yu knows his action sequences and so there's a brutal but very entertaining joyride ahead. Only that some bad subplots are left hanging in the air and kind of just disappear.

Leave it some time and you will get some decent entertainment. If you don't want to wait - rent something else instead.

5/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Simply the WORST!
22 July 2004
The movie, Steve Guttenberg wouldn't do. And rightly so!

This is just painful. Michael Winslow still manages to get a few chuckles, if not laughs, all the rest is a convoluted mess of scenes, which are supposed to be funny but could have been shot better by a bunch of teenagers with a camcorder and too much time on their hands.

Some kind of story involving a trio of dimwitted international thieves hiding their loot in Commander Lassard's luggage is thrown in around the edges. But the movie makes little use of this.

Here's something you really - like, really-really-really - don't want to watch! This was the lowest point the series could possibly get, but why did it have to go there at all? A lot of pain could have been spared on millions of people, including the actors.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Fun to be bad!
20 September 2003
This may be all you need to know in order to decide whether you want to see this.

The movie is bad. Really, really bad. And sometimes it seems to be aware of that and make fun of how bad it is. It aligns cliche after cliche and even manages to grow worse as it goes along with some moments that are bad enough to be hilariously funny.

If you can laugh about really poor quality in script writing and production values, you might enjoy it. Otherwise prepare for some serious brain damage.

3/10
1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Men may like it too!
7 September 2003
Warning: Spoilers
(minor spoilers)

Here I am! A man! Even a heterosexual man! A man who believes in the wisdom and intelligence of other men. Some other men, at least. And women.

So, here's what I didn't like about the movie: The way, that motorcycle riding Adonis is being utilized as a fertilizer without asking. That's pretty much it, concerning what disturbed me as a sexist perspective on things. Violence is used by men and women (Danielle stabs Deedee's rapist in the crotch with a pitch fork - take that as symbolical if you want, for the character it is pretty literal) and respect and wisdom is shown by men and women. Women are the focus of the story, but men don't necessarily come off as monsters all together, only if you apply a very limited view to things. Some men are portrayed in a rather favorable light, those that respect the women and cheerily let them become parts of their own stories.

After brushing aside a few pretensions, I was absolutely taken in by the easy-going way, these women (and men) successfully built an anarchic but peaceful community on their little farm. The way they just naturally picked up outcasts and lived the life that came to them... Homosexuality, mental handicaps, genius, love, birth and decay all come as parts of that big wonder of life which is celebrated in almost every scene. Only death and violent intrusions from outsiders occasionally disrupt the harmony on the farm but at least the former is, after a while, being accepted as another part of life and actually is what the movie begins and ends with, Antonia's recognition of her own impeding death and the sad event itself, between you get almost two hours of great, alternative and not really overly feminist fun. 9/10
11 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tatort: Fakten, Fakten... (2002)
Season 1, Episode 517
Starts off weak but picks up impact...
26 July 2003
Warning: Spoilers
This 'Tatort' starts of rather weakly and cliched. A friend of Prof. Boerne is the only suspect in a murder case and Boerne works hard and talks an awful lot of standard lines in trying to convince Kommissar Thiel to look for other leads.

What looks like boring standard fare at first sight suddenly takes a turn into a world of domestic violence you wouldn't want to imagine. It almost seems as if the producers exchanged the director after not being satisfied with the first half of the movie. While in the beginning most lines come off as bad acting from an unimaginative script, Axel Prahl and Jan Josef Liefers (who play Thiel and Boerne, respectively) suddenly create a lot of great chemistry out of nowhere and treat the case with more and more dedication and emergence as they uncover a terrible family secret out of the unfathomed depths of possible human behavior.

(Spoilers in this paragraph!) Try to stay with this one through the first half and you will be rewarded. If you can't do that - imagine a blend of "Misery (1990)" with a variation of "Psycho (1960)" where Bates' mother is actually still alive (but is not interested in showers) and you get a vague idea of what you're missing.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Nice, but...
11 July 2003
If you (like me) used to watch the original series as a small child, this is a nice reminiscence. But the movie makes a big mistake by aiming it's acting and production style too much at kids rather than at the young grown-ups that made up the original audience.

There are interesting sub-texts to the story like that of being able to determine who are true friends and who are not. Pumuckl is lured away from his fatherly friend Meister Eder by the Blauer Klabauter (voiced by Wolfgang Völz who also appears on-screen as the helmsman) but soon finds that cook Odessi is a much more trustworthy and likeable person. Gustl Bayrhammer's Meister Eder is set into the background, staying at home in Munich and falling ill in Pumuckl's absence, so we don't get to see too much of him, which is sad, because this was the last role for Bayrhammer who died a year before the movie was released.

All in all a great movie for your kids to go along with the series, but if you want to be reminded of the happy hours you spend with the original series, the original series is what you should watch. 5/10
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Compared to its sequels this is brilliant (minor spoilers!!)
2 July 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Lately I watched "Police Academy 4" and even though I was all alone in the room, I was embarrassed to be there. But it made me realize just how much of an original film the first installment was. I still like watching this, the one movie, that set off a whole series not just of sequels but also of very bad comedies with the word "Academy" in their titles. And the reason this could happen was that this film actually had a bucket full of very funny moments. Yes, I fondly remember the training session during which Cadet Hooks turned an arrest into a hold-up, because of her nervousness. Or when it turned out, what kind of bar the "Blue Oyster" actually is (a joke that was already dead, when the first sequel picked it up). Or when Michael Winslow started showing his sound imitation talents at a police station. A lot of this is really bad, but there's enough good stuff here to make it just the movie you want to see on a nice evening at home with the guys. Man, you even get Steve Guttenberg when he was still funny! 6/10 and a friendly pat on the authors' shoulders.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Disney - tongue in cheek
14 June 2003
Who would have thought the writers at Disney would ever come up with enough courage to do a whole movie that takes the genre and smashes it over the heads of everybody who expected to see an old-fashioned musical?

This film is about as funny as a Douglas Adams novel - it's full of self-irony and you get the suspicion that some of it is a bit mean-spirited, but enjoying it means laughing your belly out and you just have to show it to all your friends. It's stuffed with tongue-in-cheek dialogue (I L O V E the scene, in which Yzma and Kronk discuss whether to get rid of Kuzco before or after dinner - look for it in the quotes on this site!) and incredibly fast and funny animation with a sense of irreverence that not even Disney's "Hercules" was ready to deliver.

Seems to have been written by some talented teenagers on an overdose of Monty Python, Jim Carrey and "Futurama". Thanks of course go to Robin Williams for leading the way with his unforgettable portrayal of a certain blue genie. He should probably be awarded a special Oscar for every new film Disney chunks out in memory of that performance with a great cast like this!

And one last thing: Kronk definitely is the greatest stupid henchman in recent memory. He's so unknowingly dead-pan, you have to wonder if he's not actually the most mature of the characters on screen. 9/10
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lizzie McGuire (2001–2004)
Just a first impression
11 May 2003
Last weekend I watched one episode of this, because I thought: "Well, the movie appears to be a hit, so let's see what all the fuss is about." The episode, for those of you who know the series better, was the one where Lizzie falls in with this girl called Angel during detention and starts seeing her as a role-model, missing classes and cheating on tests, etc. So, judging from this one episode, here are my impressions.

It's FAKE! It was all so terribly fake, I could hardly stand it. The acting was fake, the emotions were fake, the sets and costumes were fake, the dialogues were fake, the production was fake. Sorry for you fans, but it was all really so simple and put on, I felt the whole thing had the depth of a very small saucer. Some standard tricks and camera angles were used to give it a sense of modernity and every time I was just like: "Oh, no! Don't give me that! That didn't even work when Parker Lewis did it ten years ago. But then it was funny!"

The turning point of the story, at which Lizzie realized that maybe Angel is not such a great friend after all, was when she invited her for a party with high school kids but - brace yourself - without parents!! No, Lizzie! Don't do it! If it's fun but doesn't involve chaperoning parents it must be evil!!! What is that supposed to tell the adolescent viewers? No 14-year-old can be trusted with taking care of themselves in a youthful environment? Responsibility is something that suddenly pops up in your brain the moment you turn 16? Her sleep-deprived brother, who finally gets to choose his own bed times and fails at realizing when his body wants him to give in, gives clear evidence of this, doesn't he? Kids, don't think for yourself, never listen to your own intuitions, that's what your parents are for! I'm sorry, but Marilyn Manson is a better role-model than that. (I mean it! Check out the contents of his songs. A lot of the time he's a complete fake too, but at least the man's got issues worth thinking about.)

Well, maybe I am wrong, maybe I just got hit by a particularly bad episode. But if this is what the show is about, stay away from it and watch the far wittier and more critical "Malcolm in the Middle".
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
If you want something new in your franchise, this is NOT the way to do it!
1 April 2003
Well, yes! After all these bad reviews for this movie, we can do little more than place the blame and I think, the blame is with the producers, who wanted to bring something new to the franchise in terms of genre.

This worked extremely well with the first two movies. After "Alien" was tense thriller, "Aliens" added a big-boom-action element, for which there couldn't have been anyone better than James Cameron. "Alien 3" tried to mix the elements of thriller and action a bit more than the second movie had done and, while being too cartoonish as a whole, succeeded in that and - to this reviewer - it was a step down but still OK.

Then there's this! I don't even mind the guy who said "Hey! Let's make the fourth movie a sick comedy with camp-scale 10 acting and sick jokes and let's have a man pulling a bit of his own brain out!" No, I'll forgive this person, whoever he was. But who were the geniuses that said: "Wow! What a great idea! Let's do that!"???

They put a lot of money into this and got a few great set-pieces and a brilliantly made underwater scene. So, why did they go and waste it on this? There were some obviously super ideas, like Ripley returning as a part-alien and the lost crew of survivors trying to make their way out more or less adopting a man, who they know will soon die giving birth to one of the carnivorous extra terrestrials. But too many characters spend too much time, just trying to over-cool everybody else with brain-dead one-liners and their very special abilities ("Look at me! I've actually got two fire-arms integrated into my, er, other arms!") or dying in an unusual way, which is obviously supposed to make us laugh.

Let's all just hope, the executives at Fox learned something from this and if a part 5 comes along they a) do it with some dignity and darkness and b) let Ripley die for good. Not because I don't like her, but they have wasted a great chance to turn the character into something completely new and now it's going nowhere. If you need a part 6, let Ron Perlman take the lead, because he's the one slightly appealing character in this. (Sorry, Noni! I've seen you do better.) Or he's just used to working with Jeunet and therefore gives a more accustomed performance. Anyway, don't let him be too cool and give him a few problems to chew on and we'll be fine with him as our new Ripley.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
One of the great "world-movies"
25 March 2003
In the early 90's Jarmusch delivered this charmer, a movie that unites America and Europe through one single topic, yet shows very different versions of it.

At probably the exact same moment people around the globe get into taxis. A stylish Hollywood casting agent mounts a cab in L.A., in New York it's a hapless poor man trying to get home, in Paris we encounter a blind woman, in Rome a priest and in Helsinki a bunch of drunks will tell their story. Yes, indeed. Stories are told, because each episode is an encounter with the respective cabbie, who all have a life and a past of their own.

Wynona Ryder's performance of the 20-year-old, chain-smoking taxi driver does not work very well and also makes for the least interesting story. But Armin Müller-Stahl as an East-German refugee and former clown, who is awe-struck and belittled by the bustling NYC around him makes up for a lot. His helplessness when trying to communicate with his passenger, played by Giancarlo Esposito, almost becomes tangible when it manifests in his complete inability to steer the taxi. Within very few minutes the two men develop an utterly deep and good-humored trust and friendship between them. I'd call it the funniest portion of the movie, but in Rome we encounter Roberto Benigni as an always talking, sex-obsessed cabbie. His is the story we get the least emotional or intellectual outcome from, but, hey, welcome to the Benigni Show! If you are open-minded enough to laugh about a few surprises in the field of sexual experimentation (which we don't see but only hear described without too much detail), this one will stay with you as one of the brightest twenty minutes in your life. Before Rome we visit Paris with the most mysterious, yet most catching segment, a curious story about the afore-mentioned blind woman and a black cab driver, who - we can't be sure - might be going blind himself (he's very short-sighted and therefore has problems with driving his taxi) and has a lot of questions to ask. The woman, however, is not interested in conversation, yet we get the impression she opens up more than the driver realizes. In Helsinki a group of drunks tell the story of their sleeping friend's worst day. The cab-driver listens to it. It's a terrible story about a horrible predicament and the poor fellow's life basically lies in ruins. And yet the cabbie tops the story with one of the saddest things you'll ever have heard.

The concept of the movie thinks of night as a place rather than a time, because all of the stories begin at the same moment in time but in different time zones. We move east in the process of the film and so we experience sunset in Los Angeles and early morning in Helsinki. Each of these times lends a special atmosphere to the story it tells, which becomes the most effective in the Helsinki story, which is utterly sad, however ends with a new day starting. People leave their places and go about their lives - the world moves on, none of the stories has an ending, life for each of the characters (except one) will continue.

What's so great about this movie is that it tells such different stories with such different characters who all have different pasts and intentions, each accommodating the place of action (even visually - in L.A. even the buildings appear to be candy-flavored, while in Helsinki the city is cold, drab, yet hopeful) and it all comes together to this huge picture, which reminds us that we are all different but all live on the same planet and know similar things about life, death and everything in-between. I wonder what this movie would have been like, if Jarmusch had also considered taxis in non-western countries.

I highly recommend this movie to anyone who... Oh, blast! I recommend this movie to everyone.
127 out of 150 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Daria (1997–2002)
The best-written series ever to air on MTV
13 March 2003
Daria is by far the best character ever created by MTV-writers. Surrounded by stereotypes from American highschool life she and her friend Jane are the only characters who both, analyze and reject the banalities around them. Even their own families are subject to their cynical criticism. All the supporting roles seem utterly superficial and have little understanding for Daria's lack of appreciation for the social framework of clear-cut excuses for characters they put together. This makes the criticism the series itself tries to express a bit superficial, as every argument is brought forth by stereotypes, yet there is barely a better way to say what this series is saying and it seems oddly fitting that the name of the character called Brittany has been changed into "Britney" in the German translation...
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tatort: Schatten (2002)
Season 1, Episode 506
8/10
A great contribution to the series
11 February 2003
The protagonists of the "Tatort"-series have become more and more complex and troubled over the past few years. But not often does this character indulgent approach work out properly. Here it does, mainly thanks to an inspired script and a first-class supporting cast, including such great actors as Dieter Pfaff and Dominique Horwitz (plus a surprise appearance by Roger "James Bond" Moore during the final). The film was written shortly after 9/11 and filmed in January 2002, echoing the uncertainty and fear of anything that might be referred to as terror. Komissarin Inga Lürsen must deal with her own past in a radically leftist group and her part in the killing of a man some 25 years ago. Actually she doesn't have any idea, what happened that night, but as a member of the former group of radicals is murdered and the one suspected of comitting the original crime a quarter century ago resurfaces unexpectedly, Lürsen realizes it is time to stop hiding and start looking for answers, while being under close watch by an obsessive district attorney, waiting for his chance to catch some hated R.A.F. terrorists. Occasionally plot-progress stalls and the final is a bit overly emotional. But it is a thrilling ride all along, with more than one relevation about the depths of fanatism and the coming of age of one's political ambitions - Inga Lürsen and her friends never gave up their beliefs and ideals, only the way they spread them has turned away from extremism.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
The last days of school, perfectly revisited
26 January 2003
Warning: Spoilers
This movie just perfectly reflects upon the last days of school for German youngsters. It might surprise some, that actually only about a fourth of the film takes place inside the actual school. What seems a lot more important is the school in the characters heads and hearts, the institution that got them together in the first place and that will now soon be gone. Where will they go? Will their friendships overcome the fact, that they won't see one another so much anymore?

In a last attempt to have a good time together a gang of friends explores their conceptions of the future and - more importantly - of the present and their angst concerning the changes at hand. As we follow them around through their small adventures (which include the killing of a huge inflatable penguin and the deflowering of the class-nerd among others), most viewers (Germans for sure) will be able to identify and recognize the characters as their own friends from school. This fictional small town is alive with your own fellow-pupils. You'll be able to ascribe each character to at least one person from your school days.

In addition to this, the movie features great acting, wonderful directing and photography that captures northern Germany at its most beautiful.

There are few movies I could recommend more. Watch it and you will very probably love it!
11 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed