Rating: 
Summary: Pretentious and unsatisfying
Review: First "Tadpole" and now this -- 2001 Sundance winners continue to disappoint. "The Believer" is very much reminiscent of "American History X", another pretentious film about an intelligent and articulate neo-Nazi who is confused about his beliefs, but "The Believer' has a twist: its protagonist, Daniel, is a Jew himself. Interesting concept? Sure, except the movie doesn't explore the most obvious topic: how/why he became to hate who he is -- so much so that he becomes a neo-Nazi. It largely resorts to cheap sensationalism designed purely for shock values, and many of the plot turns are utterly implausible. Daniel is perfectly willing to blow up a synagogue and beat up helpless Jewish kids, yet he won't let his fellow neo-Nazis deface the Torah? And this incident somehow triggers him into deep contemplation about his identity, yet he continues on with his neo-Nazi shenanigans? I guess this is all supposed to show how confused he is about his identity, but it just didn't work for me. Another frustrating thing about this movie is that it doesn't explain any significant Jewish references. Unless you speak Hebrew and/or is very knowledgeable of Judaism, you won't be able to understand a lot of the symbolisms in the movie. Would it have been so difficult to have the Hebrew scenes subtitled? I would've missed out on so much if I hadn't seen it with a Jewish friend who was kind enough to explain things to me during the movie.
Rating:
Summary: Then I saw his face....
Review: I think this film was intended to be tongue in cheek but the director had a failure of nerve. Certainly the biggest laugh, possibly unintentional, was provided by the two least inconspicuous bombers leaving a synagogue I've ever seen. And I haven't yet (whoops, careful, Gaz.). I think 'The Believer' would have played better as a straight farce like 'The Producers', which depicted two Jews supping with the devil in order to 'assimilate' into American culture, i.e. Be successful. The whole plot is so ridiculous that it would definately have stood this approach. The two most farcical scenes work the best. A white supremacist gets shot in the foot because he susses our hero, "You're Jewish! I knew it!" The other is a scene in a synagogue in which Jews are more interested in having an argument than evacuating the building due to a bomb threat. All good knockabout stuff. The attempted recruitment of the anti-hero by the District Attorney's office as a white supremacist mole also had a lot of comic potential sadly not explored. The central joke of the movie, I suspose, is that the hero is terrified of discovery only to find that his right wing chums aren't much bothered about the fact. Everybody's confused about who they are and obsessed with marketing. Ironically, in the DVD featurette the film makers express concern that Gosling's performance alone is still not enough to convince an audience so they decide to let us into his head with a fantasy sequence in which he sees himself as a Nazi stormtrooper. This sequence uses techniques such as black and white with slo-mo in order to 'sell' Ryan to us in the form of an advert. If Gosling was not convincing then they should have looked at the script and premise instead of using facile 'marketing' techniques that make a mockery of the central critique. Absurdly, Gosling sees himself in the image when in reality you should be looking through his eyes, I would have thought. Standing between two stools, the film comes across as far more trivial than if it had gone whole heartily for comedy.
This subject matter is not new, in any case. It was tried before in 'The Man In The Glass Booth' back in the Seventies and was rather silly there, too.
I was convinced though, that the journalist stalking Gosling was played by none other than Bill Gates himself. Well, I guess everybody needs a summer job.
Rating: 
Summary: 'To Believe or Not to Believe"
Review: An excellent depiction of a soul in torment as this young ersatz Nazi (who happens to be Jewish) struggles with the ambivalence of a self-hatred masked as totally rationalized Anti-Semitism.
Rating: 
Summary: unbelievable!...
Review: Ryan Gosling's performance was basically one of the most visceral performances in recent film history. To think that such a performance could come from such youth is simply unbelievable. This film is brilliant. It handles extreme beliefs through a balanced voew and by no means suggests or promotes any right wing activity. see this film to believe it.
Rating:
Summary: Wrestling with the unanswerable
Review: Although at first blush this film might sound like the studio pitchman's perfect concept movie, "a Jewish Nazi!", in reality it is a serious, complex, thought-provoking film that sent me home to do some research on Jewish theology and a search to discover what it is that is appealing about fascism to some people. I do think those who liked the slicker movies of American History X or Fight Club might like this movie, too, but this independent film goes beyond those in importance. Interestingly, Ryan Gosling has been compared to Edward Norton who was a lead actor in both those films, but I think that comparison is a complement to Edward Norton. Ultimately I realized it is not at all far-fetched or unthinkable for a Jew to join a fascistic hate-group and to advocate the destruction of his own kind. There is, after all, often an element of self-destruction in each of us, if only at the level of unhealthy habits such as smoking, drugs, overeating, or unsafe sex, but, more socially serious, studies have shown that gay bashers, for example, are more often closer to the homosexual end of the Kinsey scale than not. This kind of hatred is actually a deep self-hatred. And besides, there is strong evidence that Hitler, himself, was half-Jewish, based on his abusive father whom Hitler hated and was deeply ashamed of. And, in the character Daniel Balint we have an obvious underachiever, who, similar to Hitler, is an intelligent, but severely conflicted, charismatic, persuasive, passionate individual. Balint is working only as a forklift operator and seems to spend all his free time lifting weights and researching hate-group websites, but, due to his charms, the leaders of the fascist movement Balint joins attempt to conscript him into the political arena. Balint expresses the contention that he is disgusted at Jewish passivity in the face of intended annihilation and to prove it, bashes an innocent student who is unwilling or unable to defend himself. But realistically, how many of us would be able to protect ourselves against a thug on the street who has targeted us or a sniper in the bushes who has placed gunsight cross-hairs on our skull? Or against a political movement that was moving step-by-step in an unthinkable agenda towards our extermination (which, for all we know, may be happening once again right now)? But really, Balint, himself, doesn't really believe his own argument, most obviously indicated by his willing complicity to get involved with the masochistic daughter of the head of the proto-fascist organization he joins. Instead of being disgusted by her as well, he willingly punches her in the face prior to their having sex, at her request. Besides, as a people, the Jews are anything but passive and, in fact, have continued to survive (and thrive) in the face of constant enemies throughout their entire history, whether we are talking about Biblical warrior tribes wandering in the desert, individuals contending with the horrors of the Holocaust, or modern-day Israelis in an eternal battle against Arabs. Nowadays, there is even a self-defense martial arts technique credited to the Israeli Army, Krav Maga. Daniel Balint's battle is with God Himself, or, more properly said, with the meanings and means of Existence or Nonexistence. In the film we see flashbacks of him as an aggressive, questioning student, reading Biblical metaphor as factual truth and concluding that the God who required Abraham to sacrifice his son or who tortured Job with unjustifiable afflictions is the ultimate fascist (as mythologist Joseph Campbell said, "Too many rules and no mercy"). If only as a student he allowed himself to mature and wrestle with the studies some more. Existence is frought with the unthinkable, where an innocent squirrel could run across a highway right underneath the tires of your car, or a child contracts leukemia. How can one explain "why bad things happen to good people," (an issue wrestled with by a rabbi in a book by that name); ultimately, all we CAN do is accept life as it comes, keep on doing our best with what we know, and have faith that somehow it will all work out. Ultimately, the entirety of the universe is way beyond our comprehension and "faith" is there to fill in the gap. But this is unacceptable to the idealisms and passions of youth, who wants to use its muscle and energy for solutions NOW. Ryan Gosling could not have presented a more riveting performance--this is an actor who has developed his face and body into a radiant instrument. When he was beating up the student he targeting on the subway, agony reflected on his face and in his bearing, it was as if it were the student hurting HIM. When forced to attend sensitivity training with Holocaust survivors (whose actual nightmares became his own), he turned his tear ducts into vaccuums, [bringing] the tears back inside. And in his confrontation with the Torah, Gosling's own face became an open scroll embossed with letters of the flame alphabet. This is clearly a film to see even if all you want to do is observe the work of the consummate actor, but don't be surprised if when you get home, you find yourself doing some heavy thinking. This movie goes way beyond the momentary hours you fill while watching it, into, possibly, an exploration of just what kind of a believer YOU are. In fulfilling the meaning of your existence, how strong are you in the face of unanswerable questions?
Rating:
Summary: beyond the jews
Review: As a young teenager I find myself torn between what i am and what i think I should be. The story of Danny Belint is so powerful because it adresses an emotion present in all individuals on this planet. Every living person has a part of them that they hate, or a part that hates others. A part that no matter how much we tear and claw at we will never be able to let go. The Believer goes beyond Jews and anti-semitism and even beyond Summer's deep eyes and Ryan's hard body.Unfortunatley many will not shout the praises of this movie quite as loudly as they need be shouted for fear of inroducing others to a type of thought they choose not to endorse. I am not afraid, and I can assure you that this movie will not make you a fascist or Nazi sympathizer. It will NOT make you kill yourself. It will howerever provide a portal into an unfamiliar demension where directors/producers/actors do not hesitate to shed light on complicated issues and uncover horrific thoughts because of pressure from Hollywood hotshots who are only concerned with maintaining their cashflow at the box office and keep the masses happy. The Believer is on a mission to make a very powerful statement (one which you must interpret yourself)in a completly honest way. Prepare to be saddened but also enlgihtened. Compare Dnny Belint's inner turmoil with that of you own and decide how your story ends. Will you be climbing the steps of unanwered questions and self-hate for the rest of eternity?...
Rating:
Summary: Wonderfully Disturbing
Review: The Believer is easily one of the best films of the year. While it is disturbing and sometimes difficult to watch, it is also an intellectually breathtaking and profoundly moving film that no lover of thought-provoking cinema should miss...
Rating:
Summary: Subtitle Should Be: "Identity"
Review: As a Jew, watching this movie hit a resonant chord. How many times do we question our faith, our character, our God and our identity? Our protagonist, a person of extreme intelligence, cannot find satisfactory answers to his questions about the Bible, the Holocust and hate. He moves to the dark side to become the leader of a Neo Nazi organization (hiding his identity as a Jew and disguising his intimate knowledge of Jews as his interest in understanding his enemy), and painfully waivers between love and disgust for who he was, is and will become. Anyone should watch this movie, it is timely yet timeless, and superbly acted. Self discovery without an answer yet the viewer is forced to answer the question. This is based on a true story.
Rating:
Summary: Gosling's Performance Is Astounding
Review: Okay, I agree... Director/Writer Henry Bean appears to have lost part of his script when he shot "The Beleiver". The murky flashbacks to Danny Belint's miseducation in Hebrew School appear to be saying that he became a skinhead Nazi because the Jewish people were passive in the face of Hitler's genocide. It's a real stretch for Danny to become part of the thing he hates to remedy the situation. Hadn't he ever heard of the Jewish Defense League? Bean is far too kind in his portrayal of the skinheads and their facist sponsors. Many of the neo-Nazis in the movie (Danny included) talk like editors of the Harvard Law Review, not like ignoramouses that are generally attracted to Hitler's philosophy. It's hard to beleive that people with these intellectual capabilities would embrace brute violence as a solution to the ills of society. What redeems this movie is Ryan Golsing's riveting performance as Danny Belint. Gosling's mastery of body and facial language and conveying conflicting emotions is astounding. He may be one of those rare and gifted acting savants that come along once or twice in a generation. I had the same feeling watching Gosling, as I did when I saw a young Jack Nicholson in "Five Easy Pieces." But for every Nicholson, there are dozens of young actors who fail to deliver on that flash of early brilliance...Remember Eric Roberts or Jan Michael-Vincent? If Gosling makes the right career choices, the world is his oyster.
Rating: 
Summary: Brave, intelligent, difficult political cinema.
Review: These days, we are encouraged to be tolerant of minorities, to accept all lifestyles, religions and points-of-view. But, in 'The Believer', the minority-class are a gang of neo-Nazis. The film begins with a long, excruciating sequence in which the 'hero', the man we are asked to identify with, or at least follow, for 98 minutes, intimidates a Jewish student, stalks him and beats him up. The film is quite provocative like this - the fascists become a perverse mirror-image of the Jews in Nazi Germany, with their shaved heads and their own 'Stars of David' (swastika insignia); they are demonised outsiders, they feel, in a world controlled and being destroyed by Jews. The slight difference being, of course, that they have chosen this futile marginality. 'The Believer' is essentially two films, each threatening to cancel the other out. The first is a character study of a Jewish neo-Nazi, consumed with self-hatred and contempt for a race he sees as being weakly complicit in their own oppression. With a gang of mindless thugs, he goes on a spree of intimidation and vandalism, while simultaneously moving in elite right-wing circles. Ryan Gosling is amazing in the lead role, his fierce physical discipline and intellectual articulacy creating an impregnable front whose weakness is subtly revealed by twitches and his baffled eyes. Unfortunately, this performance exists in a vacuum - none of the other characters have comparable inner lives, which, added to the lack of visual depth or feel for location, makes his predicaments seem brittle. Henry Bean's script might also be guilty of reinforcing the stereotypes he wishes to examine - it is implied that Gosling stands out from his moronic cronies because the analytic brilliance and warped logic behind his poisonous gibberish are quintessentially Jewish characteristics. Secondly, in spite of the visceral power of that opening scene, 'The Believer' is a film of Ideas - character and narrative development become subordinate to long monologues expressing philosophies and concepts, each new scene forwarding another ideological point of view. Bean's presentation of these ideas is complex and paradoxical, refusing to take entrenched positions - Gosling's especially are as compellingly ambiguous as you would expect from such a confused character. This Shavian method, however, can become static, overpowering the fiery emotionalism of the lead performance. 'Believer' is clearly a screenwriter's film - you can sense Bean's relishing the freedom from generic and economic imperatives to write long, clever speeches - in a film that has the Torah as a central motif, the interpretation and translation of The Word, it is appropriate that it is so verbally driven. But cinema is about more than words, and the director is not averse to more hoky screenwriters' contrivances, such as explanatory flashbacks, leading montage and emotionally over-powering set-pieces. With all its flaws, though, there is no other American film currently like it. We should applaud its bravery and intelligence.
|
