Rating: 
Summary: Wonderful!
Review: A wonderful movie about a remarkable individual - very moving. Russell Crowe's performance is spectacular. If you're looking for fast paced action and blood and gore, it's not for you. I highly recommend it.
Rating:
Summary: Dumptruck Gladiator Freemason Sausage
Review: Half way through the movie my mate Nigel 'spunky' Turner said to me: "Flange yellow but not before seven Romulan sideboard." Had a disgruntled member of staff doctored the popcorn? We had already got off to an inauspicious start on the way to the cinema when the afore-mentioned Mr Turner told me he was in therapy over a desire to travel to Australia and steal Russell Crowe's gym shorts, immediately after use. What is this, stalkers not-so-anonymous? There are things one would rather not know or speculate about, such as nicknames. Mr Crowe does have a growing fan base now, so one should not be surprised by such fevered fan obsessions. It is a comman affliction of modern industrial societies without heroic role models. Perhaps aware of this, Mr Crowe has decided to broaden his range from a dour long face to a dour long face with a medical condition. We applaud this leap across the Grand Canyon of thespianism. Paranoid schizophrenia is a sadly ignored topic on the big screen although many of us are simply paranoid. I was convinced that the usher was French. It was the onions around the shoulders and spiral moustache. After we sat down, Nigel 'spunky' Turner insisted to me that I was panicking over nothing as he had not seen anything of the sort. This is before he had touched the popcorn so I was a touch worried. Had the thought of seeing Jennifer Connelly in yet another T-shirt temporarily unhinged me? I was certainly going to complain to the managment about Mr Turner's condition although it would be hard to prove foul play due to Nigel's already well advanced pathological inability to tell truth from fiction. When we saw 'Fight Club' together the journey to the bus stop afterwards was the most frightening seven minutes of my life. Perhaps it's a blessing then that this film decided to leave out the toilet incident depicted in the book. Either way, I decided to keep shtum. The film is directed by Ron 'Happy Days' Howard. Towards the end, my mate Nigel 'spunky' Turner turned to me and said: "This film, it ends." Glad to see you're back to your old self, old chap. Didn't have the heart to tell him about the Prince of Wales balancing on his head in a ballet tutu. With mental illness, a recovery for 'spunky' was always going to be a matter of degrees.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Movie
Review: The most compelling movie I have ever seen. Ron Howard at his best. Eight acadamy award nominations is not enough. I have seen it twice and plan to go again.
Rating: 
Summary: John Nash, Fact or Fiction--You Decide
Review: It's difficult to separate the fact from the fiction in watching this film; however, A BEAUTIFUL MIND, as directed by Ron Howard, is a compelling study of a brilliant mind gone somewhat astray. I agree that the movie is presented in a slick fashion, but I do think that it did its job in presenting us with the Cliff's Notes version of the fascinating story of John Forbes Nash, Jr.--enough to make me want to learn more about the life of this remarkable but troubled man.A BEAUTIFUL MIND opens at Princeton University in 1947, as John Nash (in a subtle and layered performance by the brilliant Australian actor Russell Crowe) and several of his contemporaries enter the doctoral program there. There is a great whiff of rivalry that permeates the air; although he is admired by his fellow students, John Nash feels threatened by them. This causes him to be quite off-putting at times. Unlike the others, he never goes to classes, which he feels are "a great waste" of his time. We see him writing formulas on his dormitory windows in search of a grand unified theory of...something. Even at this early stage, we can definitely see that there is something amiss about his personality. But there is more, much more, in store for this beautiful mind, as it descends slowly over the years into the realm of schizophrenia. Russell Crowe plays this role with as much love for Nash's flaws as well as his brilliance. His is the best portrayal of mental illness since that of Geoffrey Rush in SHINE (1997). Rush deservedly won the Oscar for Best Actor for his performance; Crowe stands a good chance of doing the same this year. The vastly underrated Jennifer Connelly plays the role of John's paramour and wife Alicia, wo gradually uncovers John's web of delusion and decides to not be a passive bystander to it all. She is being deservedly nominated for Best Supporting Actress. All in all, A BEAUTIFUL MIND is compelling, well-written, somewhat entertaining, and extremely well-acted. However, it must be noted that this is but a surface character study of a complex and troubled individual. There is much more to learn about John Forbes Nash, Jr. Taken on its own, this is a film that is well-worth watching. I, for one, cannot wait for it to be released on DVD, where hopefully there will be a lot of extra scenes that were deleted from the initial release--this may help us grasp the character better. Then again, a trip to the local public library may be the better option. You decide for yourself.
Rating: 
Summary: Bland and inoffensive
Review: A very boring movie. Yes, it might get the facts about schizophrenia correct, and Russell Crowe's peformance might be an accurate depiction of the surface symptoms of schizophrenia, but that doesn't make it a good movie. The script is one gimmick after another. The direction is completely pedestrian. The entire enterprise is dull and predictable. To be fair, Crowe does his best, but he can't transcend the essential dullness of Ron Howard's TV Movie Of The Week direction.
Rating:
Summary: A Beautiful Picture.
Review: An emotional story with deep sensibility, great performances and a wonderful original score. Really beautiful, but a little bit academic.
Rating:
Summary: Best Film of The Year? Maybe...
Review: Many argue this is the best picture of the year, and it very well may be. Unfortunately, it's hard for anyone but a real critic to make such a claim, since it requires the viewing of every film produced in a year. If A Beautiful Mind is indeed the best film of the year, then I might argue that perhaps it was a bad year for films. I say this not because I was displeased by A Beautiful Mind, but simply because it did not live up to the expectations I hold for any picture that is attributed with the title "Best Film of the Year." And, indeed, there is much to like about this film. It is a sensitive subject matter, and challenges the viewer to be jealous and frightened of the vivid life portrayed by actor Russell Crowe--and portrayed superbly at that. It certainly must have presented a far greater challenge for the screenwriter and filmmakers to humanize the disease of schizophrenia and portray it in a manner that the audience would recognize and sympathize with. It would be easy to show a man have delusions, but subtle touches where the audience observes Nash's calculations and his visualization of certain problems helps to convey the inner gift of the disease that a lesser film would have ignored. Perhaps most admirable is the way the film manages to cover the delusions and schizophrenic episodes without ever causing the audience to chuckle or divest themselves from the character's problems and reassert them to the seemingly absurd situations on screen. It is indeed easy to laugh when one does not experience such problems, but the filmmakers successfully erase any shred of jollity from the more somber moments. Ron Howard's direction is apt to say the least, and truly does succeed at the moments when Nash's abstract psychology is in full swing for the viewing audience. Prone to intense revolutions around our protagonist and appropriately showy montages of abstract thought, the direction conveys the intimacies of the mind as perhaps never illustrated before on the big screen. However, not all aspects of the film will please--or rather some aspects that are missing from the film might detract. In my own opinion, it was easy to start the film at Nash's induction into the Princeton doctoral program, however I was curious about what events lead to his malady. It's easy to say that he came to college as an introvert, but what events caused that? His parents were dead, the film tells us, but what bearing did this have on his personality? So many questions about the young Nash and his association with people come to my mind that the film actually playing seems to be the second act of a longer work. Moreover, the pacing comes across instantly as rapid and takes some coercion to get used to. In the first few minutes of the film, Nash has apparently gone through years of college with little to know inflected transfer of time. Obviously, much must be covered and the search for a film of tolerable length no doubt influenced both the neglected childhood years and the fast pace, but I certainly could have sat through an extended film to assuage my desires for the greater good of the film. But, ultimately, this film is beyond well done. Again, I cannot say that this ISN?' the best film of the year--it very well might be the best film in a bad year. Regardless, something left me still inquisitive about Nash's malady, feeling that its depiction wasn't fully explained. As a film that goes into the character's mind, however, perhaps nothing has ever captured and injected the audience as wholly and fluidly. Indeed, special effects have never before seemed more apt than to represent the inherent and private visualizations of the human imagination. And that is really what makes this film a success: the depth of character and the attention to the imagination that was never so much a factor in a film before. This is a film about the mind, as the title appropriately decrees; see it for that and be prepared to experience another man's life in another man's mind.
Rating:
Summary: A Mind-ful Experience
Review: By the time you read this, the Oscar nominations will have been announced. Certainly I'm no fan of Russell Crowe, especially with all the hoopla that he's so handsome (I find that very debatable, in my opinion) and talented (which is more likely). Hot off of last year's win as Best Actor for GLADIATOR (he only because of the oversight from THE INSIDER), Crowe has come again for a third consecutive nomination, starting in 1999 for THE INSIDER. Honestly, this has to be Crowe's most sincere performance that I've seen from him that's even worth mention (I only saw bits of L.A. CONFIDENTIAL). Crowe plays real-life Princeton teacher John Forbes Nash, who is suffering from schizophrenia. Along with Crowe is Best Supporting Actress nominee Jennifer Connelly, as his faithfully devoted wife Alicia Nash; Ed Harris as FBI agent Parcher; and Christopher Plummer as John's doctor, Dr. Rosen. Based on the book by Sylvia Nasar, this film was directed by Ron Howard, who is nominated for Best Director, a correction for the snub in 1995 for APOLLO 13, and produced by his partner, Brian Grazer, from Universal Pictures and Imagine Entertainment, their production company. I figured that A BEAUTIFUL MIND would be a pretty good film, not just from good word-of-mouth, but from the story of a man suffering from a disease and his rise and fall and rise again. It sometimes goes into RAIN MAN territory by showing that Nash is somewhat of a genius, yet flawed. We see his early years in Princeton in the 1940s to when he won a Pulitzer Prize in 1994, his marriage to Alicia and the pitfalls they face during the terrible stages of his disorder. He soon suspects that Russian agents are out to get him, which is where Ed Harris comes in. Later, after he is institutionalized, we realize that Agent Parcher (Harris) and Nash's roommate Charles, played by Paul Bettany, and his niece are figments of Nash's imagination. We see that down period in his life. Then, his rise back up! He continues his life with Alicia, they have a child, and Nash returns to Princeton to continue teaching. In the end, he gets the recognition he deserves as students give him their pens as a sign of their deepest respect of him, something he wanted since his student years. The screenplay, written by Akiva Goldsman, has many great moments of poignancy, zing, suspense, and tenderness. While playing a game (whatever it was!) of putting white and black chips on a board, Nash is challenged by a fellow colleague. His response after being asked if he was afraid to play: "Terrified, mortified, stupified... by you!" It had a good comedic moment and timing there. Or when the "Reds" are chasing Nash and Parcher, there is some gunfire and car chases. And when Alicia begs Nash to realize what is real - that SHE is real - added dramatic punch. In the end, I left the theater very impressed by what I saw. And even though I'm not a fan of my rival Russell Crowe, he has earned my sincere respects. Good luck at the Oscars, guys! In the words of Russell Crowe at the recent Critics Circle Awards: "Opie done good!"
Rating:
Summary: Awesome film...
Review: This was an awesome film. Crowe provides a great performance in a film that gives insight to the mind of a schizophrenic genius. A must see for anyone touched by a person dealing with a mental illness.
Rating:
Summary: Ronnie's best work
Review: Ron Howard has never been one of my favorite directors, I liked Apollo 13 and Ransom. But he made two gargantuan missteps in the form on EDTV and The Grinch, both of which were exceedingly mediocre. I saw this movie because I am a huge fan of Jennifer Connolly and Russell Crowe always seems to give a magnificent performance. And I wasn't disappointed, Russell gives another great performance as troubled genius John Nash, and Jennifer Connolly more than acts with him as his wife. This movie is definitely Ron Howards best work. It is very mainstream, it's view of schizophrenia is subdued, there is no visual screwing around in the form of quick cuts and insane visual tricks to involve one in Nash's world. It wasn't what I expected and I was refreshed to see a straight-forward depiction of schizophrenia. It also has those little scenes that stay in my memory and really struck a chord. The scene involving the garbageman was definitely one of them. But that said, this view of schizophrenia is probably the main problem with the film. I doubt schizophrenia is as simple as ignoring your visions, it's a little more complicated than that I would surmise. It bothered me, but not enough for me not to recommend the film. It is entertaining, and the lead performances are both deserving of Oscars, especially Jennifer who was screwed last year after her snub for Requiem for a Dream. Its an example of how moving, mainstream filmmaking can be if it's done well.
|
