Rating: 
Summary: Amateurish attempt at depth
Review: A... mish-mash of styles, coupled with choppy editing, awkward dialogue, and wretched film quality - thoroughly unentertaining.
Kietel puts in a decent performance, but Sorvino does her usual dry/wooden bit. The plot's attempts at some sort of metaphysics is meandering and dull. Not worth your time unless you want to see how... a big name cast can fail in an "art" movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Please...
Review: Although this movie has going for it Harvey Keitel as well as an interesting mystery stone, overall it is pure arthouse garbage. Yes, I like enigmatic, intricate movies. Yes I can suspend my disbelief. Yes I like it when movies enter a realm where reality as we know it loses ground. But this story is a mish mash. See Donnie Darko or even, as suggested by other reviewers, Jacob's Ladder for better made, well-constructed films that touch on the same subjects.Only about 10 minutes of this flick retained my attention. The rest was at best a yawn and for the most part, a frustrating eye-roller. Mostly wooden performances (Keitel is his usual bad self, DaFoe is more than adequate) but the story is just cheesy and it has one of the worst endings I have ever seen. I almost threw up.
Rating:
Summary: Uneasy mix between melodrama and the supernatural
Review: Being a fan of Auster and Keitel I was looking forward to "Lulu". On the plus side; the acting is great and the plot is pretty offbeat. But the stuff about the weird stone and the "cult" (?!) doesn't really work to say the least. People who hated the plot of "Jacob's Ladder" should also avoid this. And Mira and Harvey as a couple didn't really convince me (even though when I'm at Keitel's age I would surely love to find a young groovy chick like Mira!). Credits must go to the somewhat original script and the inspired performances but still, well, I guess I just ain't that romantic uncynically kind of guy. But check it out because it's not a total waste of your time if you're lookin' for something different (even though my girl fell asleep).
Rating:
Summary: Uneasy mix between melodrama and the supernatural
Review: Being a fan of Auster and Keitel I was looking forward to "Lulu". On the plus side; the acting is great and the plot is pretty offbeat. But the stuff about the weird stone and the "cult" (?!) doesn't really work to say the least. People who hated the plot of "Jacob's Ladder" should also avoid this. And Mira and Harvey as a couple didn't really convince me (even though when I'm at Keitel's age I would surely love to find a young groovy chick like Mira!). Credits must go to the somewhat original script and the inspired performances but still, well, I guess I just ain't that romantic uncynically kind of guy. But check it out because it's not a total waste of your time if you're lookin' for something different (even though my girl fell asleep).
Rating:
Summary: Europe
Review: Contrary to what it says on the webpage this DVD is NOT suitable for all regions. It does not play in Europe.
Rating: 
Summary: Mixed emotions...
Review: Everyone acted excellent, but I was a little dissapointed with the ending. I know it's supposed to be abstract and all, but I've seen films which were just as abstract, yet had a more satisfying ending. But I do recommend the film, regardless of the ending. For anyone who has ever been in love with another (and I mean requited and unconditional love), the sincere love scenes will really hit home, and are worth watching. Surprisingly, even though the two fall in love the first day they meet, it is all believable and real, and not contrived at all. Very intense emotions. By the way, if you like Keitel in this one, rent "Holy Smoke".
Rating: 
Summary: Aphrodite, metaphysics, and illusion
Review: How do I describe this film? Let's just say it's the end that makes this film (I believe direct to video) most interesting. I have a theory about the life we lead and about each moment of that life. What is real and what isn't? How long a moment last? What may seem a second to the ordinary person, could be a whole lifetime to someone else. Whether it's the first thought in your head or the last thought before you blink out of existence. With that said, you might think that this film explores that. Perhaps, perhaps not. It's what you think that happened. It's what you get out of this picture. This is one of those films that warrants follow on discussions after you see it. Especially for those who may go on to psychological, or better yet, philosophical endeavors. Harvey Keitel plays a man who hasn't had such a pleasant life and he gets shot one day. During his recovery, he has a change of heart. He meets Mira Sorvino. Because he thinks he has met the perfect person things start to change for him and for her. It's gets to be your basic love story. Ah, but there is a twist (or is it really a twist). That is all I am going to say about this film. Rent it, catch it on cable and enjoy this well-made film. It may be slow for some, but I think the pay off (in my opinion only) is worth it.
Rating:
Summary: Highly Enjoyable
Review: How do I describe this film? Let's just say it's the end that makes this film (I believe direct to video) most interesting. I have a theory about the life we lead and about each moment of that life. What is real and what isn't? How long a moment last? What may seem a second to the ordinary person, could be a whole lifetime to someone else. Whether it's the first thought in your head or the last thought before you blink out of existence. With that said, you might think that this film explores that. Perhaps, perhaps not. It's what you think that happened. It's what you get out of this picture. This is one of those films that warrants follow on discussions after you see it. Especially for those who may go on to psychological, or better yet, philosophical endeavors. Harvey Keitel plays a man who hasn't had such a pleasant life and he gets shot one day. During his recovery, he has a change of heart. He meets Mira Sorvino. Because he thinks he has met the perfect person things start to change for him and for her. It's gets to be your basic love story. Ah, but there is a twist (or is it really a twist). That is all I am going to say about this film. Rent it, catch it on cable and enjoy this well-made film. It may be slow for some, but I think the pay off (in my opinion only) is worth it.
Rating:
Summary: A terrific movie--but could have been a great movie
Review: I don't want to give away the ending, but this whole movie takes place on the bridge between life and death. I think it may be Auster's best work since the New York Trilogy. It has all the nested levels of reality that those novels had and which sort of got lost in his later books. It also points up an important paradox in Auster's universe of paradoxes: You can accept a world run by chance without being a cynic. This film is all about paradox. There is a blurring or merging of opposites: The magic stone is both a love potion and Pandora's box; Izzy is both a rotten bastard and Sir Galahad; Celia is both a true hearted girl and Lulu; the movie itself is both romantic and existential, etc. In Auster's world--as in the real world--everything contains a little of its opposite, so that in the end no definition holds up. But this chaotic symmetry is spoiled by the final cut. Celia's dark side is shown in the movie within the movie, a remake of G.W. Pabst's 1928 film Pandora's Box (based on Wedekind's play, like Berg's opera), and these scenes of the movie being made, with Celia as Lulu, are a prominent part of Auster's script. They were shot and were still in the film during postproduction interviews given by Auster and even the film editor. But between then and the time the movie was released for rental, all those Lulu scenes got cut out! I can easily see how this would have happened in the old Hollywood studio system. Some bottom-line weasle would have considered these scenes a distraction from the rest of the movie simply whacked 'em out without consulting the director. But in this case Auster and his producer seem to have had complete control over the project, so I can only conclude that Auster himself must have done the cutting, or at least agreed to it. Why, Paul?! If anybody has any info on this, please write to me. This movie is a good as "Smoke"--better in my opinion--but it could have been great without the cuts.
Rating:
Summary: Mixed emotions...
Review: I must admit, I rented Lulu on the Bridge because I'm a big Willem Dafoe fan. But even the excellent acting of Dafoe, Redgrave, Keitel, and Sorvino couldn't save this mess. The concept behind the movie was interesting, but the script was weak. Though the actors struggled valiantly to make it all come together, the dialogue was often pedantic and unbelievable. The scenes themselves were often implausible, and not for the metaphysical reasons the director may suspect. No, the slice of life bits made it difficult for me to suspend my disbelief. A prime example would be the dinner party in which a worldly twelve- or thirteen-year-old girl asks her stepmother to tuck her into bed. I don't know of any girls that age who would ask to be tucked in, especially around company. I think the problem with this movie is that it tries too hard to be deep; it tries too hard to demonstrate the innocence of real life. As a result, the scenes are trite, unrealistic, and boring.
|
