Alessandro teaches musicology at the university of Strasbourg. He is also a volunteer reader in hospitals. He shares his apartment with his daughter, 15-year-old Irina, and his anarchist brother Luigi. Life is not always rosy at Alessandro's for three main reasons : he is a widower and has never really recovered from the death of his young wife ; his brother is some kind of parasite who refuses to sell his paintings to capitalist speculators and so to contribute to the cost of the household ; Irina, whom he has raised alone since she was five months old and always felt close to, is rapidly changing from little girl to teenager and wishes to be treated as such. One day, Florence, a beautiful young woman, gets into Alessandro's life. Will he eventually take his chances with her? And will he manage to stop stifling Irina? And will he finally get on with Luigi?
Writer:Philippe Claudel (scenario, adaptation and dialogue)
Alessandro teaches musicology at the university of Strasbourg. He is also a volunteer reader in hospitals. He shares his apartment with his daughter, 15-year-old Irina, and his anarchist ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
(it) wrote: Cast: Maria Fernandez Ache, Karl Anton Leigh, Peter Coyote, Forest Whitaker, Juan Carlos Pardo Pardo, Damon Younger, Jeremy Renner, Joanna Scanlan, Julia Stiles, Alfred Harmsworth, Philip Jackson, Anne Reid, Phyllida Law Director: Baltasar Kormkur Summary: When a claim is sought on the million-dollar life insurance policy of notorious con artist Kelvin Anderson, crack investigator Holt is assigned to uncover the truth in Baltasar Kormakur crime noir. Holt (Forest Whitaker) suspects deceit from the get-go, and he stealthily tries to uncover the truth from Kelvin's sister Isold (Julia Stiles) and her erratic husband, Fred (Jeremy Renner). My Thoughts: "The movie wasn't very good. I mean it was a decent suspense film, just not very interesting. I thought the brother and sister scamming was more interesting then the insurance fraud. The acting by Julia was good, Whitaker's Irish accent through me off. I am not sure if it was good or ridiculous, or why he needed the accent in the first place. I'm leaning more towards ridiculous. I did enjoy the look of the film. The scenery and the depressing gloom of it. Especially that great creepy house. But besides those things, the film was a sleeper for me."
Marty H (mx) wrote: The movie begins with a bunch of elitist white men bickering about how they are going to make and profit from a live-action film of Pancho Villa as himself and his revolutionary Mexican army. I try to stay away from films about films. I appreciate Hollywood film and its history but movies about movie making tends to lose my interest. As this film moves along, we begin to see more of who Pancho Villa was and what his passions and motives were. The story seemed to shed light on Villa's life that is otherwise ignored or forgotten in history. Banderas is the perfect Pancho Villa. No one could do it better. Unfortunately, the lead actor alongside Banderas was miscast in my opinion, (Eion Bailey). Alan Arkin's appearances are infrequent, which is good in my opinion because his humor and ruthless violence were tasteless and out of place. Its always nice to see Arken, even when he's collecting teeth from dead bodies, but his presence is a typical American filmmaker tactic to bring comic relief and bravo-machismo which relieved the film of some of its authenticity. A commendable effort for a TV movie, (HBO). Still, the romanticizing of war and killing in light of making a movie (within a movie) strikes a moral chord for me. Even when it seemed that Frank Thayer (Bailey) and his small film crew became invested in more than just making a movie, they were willing to risk the lives of Pancho's Villistas in order to "get a better picture". The whole idea behind this is absurd. I don't care about movie contract disputes in the middle of the Mexican Revolution. But this film tries to make you care. an execution speaks many words and tells a sad story. Many times in this picture people lose their life in the blink of an eye and it just serves as background noise, a prop, a distraction.
jay n (gb) wrote: Bland comedy-drama which misses in several key areas. It's a stretch to begin with that anyone as smart and lively as Susan Sarandon's character would put up with the selfish jackass that Don Johnson plays let along long for him to return.
Marc R (es) wrote: In many ways Woody Allen's most complete feature, bringing the philosophical ruminations and existential concerns of his past films to a warm, tragicomic, but also life affirming head. Allen sees his wonderful characters with a clarity and acuity of a great novelist, yet his signature voice seems more invisible here, standing back perhaps with sad amusement at a group of people whose logic and hopes are at the mercies of their emotions and life's tumultuous rhythms. What Allen seems to be saying this time is that life offers just enough for us to have to just roll with it, if only we stopped and looked. A brilliant cast and Allen's most assured direction are just icing on what may be his last masterpiece.
Robert H (mx) wrote: CADDYSHACK is yet another movie that everyone else but me has seen until now (apparently). It's directed by Harold Ramis and features Bill Murray and Chevy Chase in their prime, along with Rodney Dangerfield. Why wouldn't it be good? Well, if 90 minutes of improvisation with little to no plot is your idea of good comedy (and considering comedies these days, there are a lot of people who feel that way), then you'll feel right at home. For me, there were a number of individually funny bits from each of the main cast members, but the unfocused, episodic nature of the story kept me from being invested too much in the goings-on at this snooty country club. The best running gag is one that everyone is probably familiar with: Bill Murray and the gopher. But it was only funny in and of itself, feeling mostly tangential to the story (or to justify Bill Murray's presence). There was the potential to do a satire on class conflict, but Rodney Dangerfield threw a wrench in that (most of his bits didn't work for me at all). Chevy Chase got to do some of his shtick as well, but overall it felt like all the cast members were just trying to show each other up instead of being a real ensemble cast. I will say that the soundtrack, heavily featuring Kenny Loggins, was quite good though. Ultimately, I did laugh a handful of times but the script and its execution left a lot to be desired.
Bruce B (gb) wrote: Up till this time I have missed watching this so called cult film/ Made with Drive - Ins in mind I'm sure its not a bad film. I was amazed to see a very young Richard Kiel who played jaws in a number of James Bond Films. In this movie he was EEGAH the giant who basically scared only 3 people until last 20 minutes. Archie Hall Jr what a hair job, don't see that today. Also a beautiful ford station wagon made a number of appearances throughout the movie. 3 1/2 stars. 10-27-11
Sue B (jp) wrote: 1920's Paris was a real treat to see in this silent film. The story is unimportant-- this is a visual feast!
Ardiansyah B (kr) wrote: Very funny in dark kind of way. Reminds me of Shoot Em Up movie.
Paul C (it) wrote: Great special effects 99% practical to no CGI crap. Gore hounds will love it for the F/X , story wise just suspend your disbelief and have fun with it. Couple of just absurd moments that had me rolling , good silly fun.