Viveca is happily married to Cholo, a renowned and respected psychiatrist. Unknown to many, Viveca, has long been leading a double life. She has an appetite for men, for quick, and sometimes very dangerous sexual adventures, be it real or fantasy. There is no question in her mind how much she loves her family. Viveca had a one-time affair with Andre, a DJ who is bored with his life. He surrounds himself with toys from drugs to race cars to Dahlia, who is more a girl toy than a girlfriend. A one night stand with Viveca gives Andre the speed he has been looking for: a forbidden love affair with a very attractive married woman. He pursues Viveca like there is no tomorrow. Viveca tries to distance herself from Andre, but he proves to be too stubborn for her. Complications upon complications set it. Should Viveca remain secretive of what is happening or continue living a life of deceit.
Viveca (Ara) is happily married to Cholo (Albert), a renowned and respected psychiatrist. Unknown to many, Viveca, has long been leading a double life. She has an appetite for men, for quick, and sometimes very dangerous sexual adventures, be it real or fantasy. There is no question in her mind how much she loves her family. Viveca had a one-time affair with Andre (Wendell), a DJ who is bored with his life. He surrounds himself with toys from drugs to race cars to Dahlia (Krista Ranillo), who is more a girl toy than a girlfriend. A one night stand with Viveca gives Andre the speed he has been looking for: a forbidden love affair with a very attractive married woman. He pursues Viveca like there is no tomorrow. Viveca tries to distance herself from Andre, but he proves to be too stubborn for her. Complications upon complications set it. Should Viveca remain secretive of what is happening or continue living a life of deceit. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Kyle G (br) wrote: A movie that is acted in a sense that you completely believe the personalities and actions of the girls. The lead character is actually Bobo, as her conflict is the most well-developed. The band's masterpiece, "Hate the Sport," pretty accurately mirrors a 12- or 13-year-old's understanding of the world, incorrectly asserting that nuclear plants pollute the air, and stressing that "children in Africa are dying," a phrase that has become so insolently pedantic in the first-world. It is also very funny and I quite enjoyed the early gym scene where they are imagining up the lyrics to the disdain of their teacher. If you're looking for a miracle movie where the band eventually hits the big time, look elsewhere. This film is better than that anyway.
Eric P (de) wrote: Hey! boobs! that's about it folks. It's boring, takes way too long to capture your interest. When it finally does "do something" you are presented with the typical Hollywood montage scenes meant to replace actual writing. Worst of all, after waiting through the entire movie, the ending falls flat, no good guys outwit the back guys, no intelligent plan to win against all odds. Just bang, done, credits. There is an attempt to create a connection to the characters, but all you get is a sense of who is going to live, who is going to die, and you would be right in your guesses. it's that obvious. BORING! girls will like the good looking men, boys will like the boobs and sex that do nothing to advance a good story. It will make enough to satisfy the investors, and they will make another one next year. MEH.
Stuart K (ru) wrote: Based upon the 2000 bestseller by Armistead Maupin (who wrote Tales of the City), this is a true-life psychological thriller which happened to Maupin in 1992 and it kicked off a real life mystery which is still open to this day. It has a good cast, with it's lead playing well against type, and doing well with this complex and short mystery. Gabriel Noone (Robin Williams) is a gay radio talk-show host who has fallen into a slump after his partner Jess (Bobby Cannavale). Gabriel is given the manuscript of a memoir written by teenager Pete Logand (Rory Culkin), which chronicles the sexual abuse he's suffered over the years, which has left him with AIDS. Pete now lives in Wisconsin with social worker Donna (Toni Collette). Peter and Gabriel begin a phone correspondence, but one day it stops, and Jess believes Pete and Donna's voices are almost identical. Gabriel is concerned for Pete's well-being, and flies out to Wisconsin to see if he's OK. When he finds the address doesn't exist, that Pete is reportedly in hospital and that Donna is blind. Nothing is what it seems, and the hospital is 50 miles away, and the locals believe Pete exists, even if they've never seen him. It's a good thriller that doesn't waste time, but even if the story is unbelievable, it's all true. Williams is a great actor, and he should be making more serious films, and Collette makes a good femme fatale. No-one has ever got to the bottom of what really happened, and maybe we never will.
(gb) wrote: absolutley crazyness... a little slow in plot.. but crazy events and ending
Ahmed M (nl) wrote: The first bit of the script sounds good, "Hollywood producer Marty Wolf, steals a class paper of Jason Shepherd and is making a movie out of it" but then you think about it, and realize how bad it might be as a movie, well it's just that.
Chablis L (ru) wrote: Original post date: 8.7.2005 I remember this book being an excellent read. One of those, "I know it's getting close to two o'clock in the morning, but I want to get through just one more chapter...and maybe just one more after that" kinds of books. I'm reading one of those right now. "The Historian." Up 'til three with it; I've already been to the drive-thru Starbucks for a venti cappuccino. I admit, I frequent Starbucks, because I can get a cappuccino to go. I guess I could stop in at the Italian restaurant down the street and order a cappuccino, but then I would have to brush my hair and get dressed and sit there with it, not smoking because you can't smoke anywhere anymore. I prefer throwing on a pair of shorts, zipping over to the drive-thru Starbucks, ordering my cappuccino and coming home to smoke a half pack of cigarettes with it. Plus, the people-watching while waiting in line is fantastic. Today, there was a ditzy blonde in a Passat who couldn't drive a stick-shift. She kept backing up then going forward, chattering away on her cell phone (at 9:30 on Sunday morning...who's awake to answer the phone?), and when she pulled up to the window, she exchanged an empty Starbucks cup for a brand new Starbucks cup, and I couldn't help but laugh, imagining her caffeine-filled life. She was obviously a perky thing. I could see her through her back window, bopping up and down, looking for something on her passenger seat, looking in the back seat, looking in the mirror, talking, talking, talking, throwing that skinny food-deprived arm out the window like a frog's tongue zapping a juicy fly to snatch her venti non-fat carmel macchiato with a double-shot of espresso (by the way, it is espresso, not EX-presso), then almost mowing down a mother and her two children (all dressed in matching T-shirts and boldly colored Capri pants) in her spastic effort to get into first gear and zoom away to do lord knows what...certainly not eat or smoke or sit on her rump in front of the computer composing anything, except maybe filling in her spreadsheet of Weight Watchers points. "Um, um, um, let's see, 500 calories for morning coffee plus 500 calories for afternoon coffee plus one stick of sugar-free gum. Okay, I'm done!" So back to "Midnight"... I've found that when I read a book before seeing it executed on the big screen, I'm generally disappointed in the film. Books are wonderful things. I don't read as much as I should because I'm an extremely slow reader. I soak in every word, making images in my mind, sometimes going back to a previous chapter to remember something important. The Color Purple, A Room With a View, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Michael Crichton's Sphere especially...all books I prefer to the films. Add "Midnight" to the list. Clint Eastwood is a talented director, no question; but I think he tried to bite off more than he could chew with this film. The BOOK paints a wonderfully descriptive picture of Savannah, Georgia and its inhabitants. You become completely absorbed in the atmosphere, and for a few hours of reading time, you feel as if you're there, you know the characters intimately. A book has the luxury of space to tell its story; whereas, film is limited to several hours, unless you're as courageous as Peter Jackson, who understood that retelling a tale as sacrosanct as The Lord of the Rings requires the proper combination of reverence, balls, bankroll and time. "Midnight" the book introduced a wealth of characters, experiences, surroundings and impressions that united to create a whole. "Midnight" the movie is a disjointed mish-mash of confusing and uninteresting incidents and half-conversations. If The Book is a perfectly baked loaf of bread, The Movie is nothing but crumbs. A great deal of time is spent on The Lady Chablis. Yes, she's a curious character, and I delighted in reading about her; but watching scene after scene of The Lady Chablis when, in trying to determine what the focus of the movie is, you mechanically focus on the trial of Jim Williams, you ask yourself, "What is the point of her?" It's not like she sheds any revolutionary light on the relationship between Jim and that nasty Jude Law. She doesn't hold the key to the mystery; she's simply a curiosity. My mother made an interesting observation. She said that in the scenes between John Cusak and The Lady Chablis, Cusak always looks like he's keeping an arm's-length distance from her, like he's not quite sure what? this person is...like he doesn't get it, and it makes him nervous. Minerva, the VooDoo priestess, comes off like a campy narrator in a local production of "Our Town." From her park bench in the opening scene, I fully expected her to break into: "Up here is Main Street, and here's the Town Hall and Post Office combined. First automobile's going to come along in about five years; belonged to Banker Cartwright, our richest citizen, lives in the big white house up on the hill." I can't stand it when characters merely laugh like they have some special insight that they're not going to share with the audience because that's supposed to make them "mysterious." I can see the script in my head: Minerva chuckles and nods. "Skylark" Up. Segue to slow C-U of graveyard. (snore.) The editing is weird, staccato. Incidents and conversations are cut off with no apparent resolution or point. They don't lead to the next scene; we go to something completely different, and about 10 minutes later, you're left wondering, "Well, what was the point of what he said back there?" or "Why did she have that look in her eye?" If this is some lame attempt to force the viewer into making his or her own assessment, it doesn't work. Eastwood, in his limited time frame, only gives us glimpses of the characters and environment that writer John Berendt fleshed out for us so beautifully in his novel. I love John Cusak, but his character is so bland, they could have propped up a cardboard cut-out of Cusak smirking in every scene and used his million-dollar salary to pay the catering bill. Jude Law apparently thinks that southern people always stand with their knees apart. I'm surprised he didn't ask for a pair of suspenders he could hook his thumbs through. Kevin Spacey as Jim Williams and Jack Thompson as his attorney were the only two mildly believable and somewhat intriguing characters in this film; and I think the only reason I was interested in Spacey was because he had a mustache. Sorry, Clint. You didn't make my day with this effort.
Lauri L (au) wrote: This is just horrible without any life to its character. Winona Ryder fails miserably here.
Scott C (mx) wrote: It was well done, I guess, but I don't really like Madonna that much.
Sally H (jp) wrote: Creepy, fascinating film noir. Not quite as gripping as Laura and hasn't worn quite as well, but still well worth watching and Gene Tierney is captivating as always.
Ilsa L (us) wrote: Terrific sequel to the original movie.
Scott S (ru) wrote: Doctor X (1932) -- [4.5] -- There's a house full of mad scientists and one of them is a cannibal. For such a lively concept, the movie is pretty subdued until the final five minutes. I hate Lee Tracy as the reporter. His annoying brand of humor contaminates the whole film. Seeing him accidentally back into skeleton after skeleton made me wish the cannibal scientist would just eat him already. Oh, and he has a hand buzzer gag that he uses. Over. And over. And over again. It's like Tracy and his character are from an entirely different movie. "Doctor X" is sometimes known as the first color horror film, but it's just a two-strip Technicolor process, not full-blown color. The two-strip process is muddy-looking, but gives an interesting ambience to the movie.
Alec B (gb) wrote: The plot is centered on a good enough idea that should work as an offbeat romantic comedy, but it just never becomes as fun or as funny as the film promises.
Matt G (ca) wrote: When in conflict, the only true path to healing comes through empathy. Remember the Titans knows this and, like the sport of football itself, is full of attitude and heart. Washington's commitment to his performance elevates everything and everyone around him, and even though it's corny and not all of the side stories hold water, it does a brilliant job of placing us in the midst of the racial turmoil. And I really think I need to dust my house...
Khaled M (au) wrote: The British "Requiem for a dream", about a lost generation blowing out its brain diving into darkness.