Rating: 
Summary: Taut,well-executed,and realistic
Review: The plot of this film concerns a professor, superbly played by Jeff Bridges, who discovers that his neighbors,superbly played by Joan Cusack and Tim Robbins,are terrorists. He learns of their plans and tries to foil them. The twist ending will stay for you with days.
Rating:
Summary: ARLINGTON ROAD IS A VERY SUSPENSFUL FILM
Review: Arilngton Road is a very suspensful fim that has everything you wouldn't expect. Although when I saw this there wasn't as much action as I though there would be. If you havent seen this movie yet and you want to buy it, I suggest rent it first.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Ideas, Bad Movie
Review: If you catch the DVD version of this movie, you get an opportunity to listen to the script writer explain his story's intentions. If you removed the ridicules plot from the movie and just used the ideas from his script, you could make a movie that would be far more believable and, because so, effective. I understand the value of using suspended belief, but like many others have stated about the ending of this movie, the plot is manipulated to such an extent that all the previous actions are forced to fall too perfectly into place. Although this movie's ending is dark with an anti-hero, it's just as frustrating to watch as when the good guy saves the day.The idea of never knowing your neighbor is a strong one, and an accurate commentary of modern communities. The idea that terrorist acts such as the Oklahoma bombing are a group effort, is logical and believable. Also, the idea of society needing a name, the face a person to be made accountable for (especially domestic) terrorists acts, in order for us to feel safe again, rings true and accurate. Instead of making Jeff's and Tim's characters real people in a situation where domestic terrorism could occur, the director really just uses them to play with these ideas. Jeff's character just happens to have had his wife die working the FBI, and is therefore highly conscious of the threat and national reaction to terrorist activities. Tim's character is a right-winged extremist that movies in across the street. This set-up is too much to ask us to accept. That Tim's character is only exposed enough give us a little dirt on his background, does work in the sense that one truly never knows someone or knows why they would do something so horrible as to bomb a public building. That the good guy doesn't always win, is something more movies should mimic. Something, still, just isn't right. Unlike the anti-hero Tim portrays in The Player, his character's winning in this movie doesn't have any point, or provide any insight to the "why" of a society with factions intent on killing the rest of us and starting over...clean. Tim's character is a commander of an invisible army, able to make the rest of us victims at will in an invisible war. In short, the movie sacrifices the sound ideas incorporated in the original story to over dramatization and exaggeration. We're left with the message that since we no longer know one another, we have no concept of what the people around us could be, so be scared
Rating: 
Summary: Very Good but Underrated Thriller
Review: This movie is one of the sleepers of 1999. It had a very short run at the box office before being released to video, which after watching the movie I found really surprising. Arlington Road is a well-done thriller about domestic terrorism and paranoia that seems very appropo for our times (forget the anti-Clinton rantings of the idiot, er, reviewer below who appears more interested in promoting some paranoid right wing agenda than in honestly and objectively reviewing a movie). The ending is quite surprising and alone justifies watching this movie. Robbins and Bridges both turn in very good performances, as does Joan Cusack as the wife of a terrorist bomber. The only thing that kept me from giving this movie a higher review is that the plot seems rather implausible.
Rating: 
Summary: The ending blew it all up
Review: This is a great movie. The struggles of Michael Faraday to uncover to sinister plots of his next-door neighbor as a deranged mad bomber is superb. THE ENDING BLEW UP THIS MOVIE SO BAD THAT IT TOTALLY CHANGED THE MOVIE! The ending gives the message that evil conquers good, and that the life of a man named Mivhael Faraday should end in such vain. This is a movie that is suppose to give you something to think about: that the bombings in this country may not be one-man operations. I think that this movie was superbly done, except that at the end Michael should have diffused the bomb instead of it blowing up and himself getting the blame, while the real killer of hundreds walks away. This would've gotten 5 of 5 stars if the ending was like that. Instead it got one star because the ending threw all of the movies superb action and suspense in the garbage.
Rating: 
Summary: Great thriller
Review: As this was released months earlier in The Netherlands, than it was in the US, we could not judge it on BO gross, but on content. That is where it succeeded grandly. From the great credit sequence with the horrifying soundtrack to the tense finale...A great tense thriller...
Rating:
Summary: Very creepy and thought provocing
Review: Alot of people didnt like this film because of the bad guys win ending but you have to realize that there are so many battles of good and evil good has got to lose a few. Sorry folks but THEY can win and often do in real life. Also it is foolish and neive to think this sort of thing could not happen.
Rating:
Summary: this has been done before
Review: after viewing this mildly exciting movie it dawned on me that this had been done before and much better without the fireworks. One only has to remember Warren Beatty"s wonderful trip into true political paranoia in "The Parallax View" to wax nostalgic how this movie is a poor ripoff of the older classic. To bad they wasted Jeff Bridges on this inferior remake.
Rating:
Summary: Okay, but too long.
Review: Well acted with good cinematography. Where the movie falls down is in its formulaic attempts at suspense. How many times have we seen someone snooping in someone else's office? Other plot points just scream stupidity. For example, why doesn't Bridges just lay his entire set of discoveries out to the FBI? Why would the terrorists rely on this wacked out prof. to carry out their plan? Why didn't Bridges go to the cops the instant they blackmailed him? Why is it that the criminals as infallible geniuses? But this movies' main fault lies in the fact that it becomes boring. It is simply too long. And the ending plot twist involving Bridges is not particularly creative. If the purpose of the director was to make me believe that there is a network of right-wing nuts posing as successful architects infesting our neighborhoods, he fails miserably. Actually, I've had two bombings within two miles of my home within the past 5 years both perpetrated by left-wing animal rights nuts. Perhaps Hollywood should look in that direction for some reality based terrorism studies. Still, in spite of this, the movie was entertaining and worth a rental.
Rating:
Summary: Anti-conspiracy claptrap
Review: Omnipotent, void-of-rational-motives private citizens terrorize the nation and a helpless, incompetent FBI. Right. If you want a glimpse into the MOTIVE FOR THIS MOVIE, check the credits. The makers thank the Teaching Tolerance Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). The SPLC, "opponents of terrorism", considers any prominent figure who disagrees with a virtual police state to be the near equivalent of a domestic terrorist, or aiding and abetting them. For those who look closely at the REAL-LIFE terrorism problem in the US, a very different picture emerges. Clinton pardons terrorists left and right. FBI and ATF agents infiltrate the neo-Nazi movement in Oklahoma, a few of whom embolden them with weapons and terrorist plans, largely unbeknownst to others. A massive Justice Dept cover-up of the real players in the OKC bombing ensues. It all sounds crazy, but the evidence is astounding. Read The Secret Life of Bill Clinton authored by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, a former Clinton supporter and very intelligent reporter for The Sunday Telegraph in Britain.
| 
