Rating: 
Summary: Absorbing, but slow moving
Review: Fielding Pierce (Billy Crudup) has one ambition: to be President of the United States. His entire life is planned out to reach that goal. Only he didn't plan on Sarah (Jennifer Connelly). Sarah is a free spirited, radical human rights advocate. We meet them on the day she dies and then flash back to the inception of their relationship in 1972. He is The Establishment personified. She is an iconoclast. Two philosophies more incompatible could not possibly exist, but despite everything, they fall in love. The story then fast-forwards to Fielding's campaign for the House of Representatives ten years after Sarah's death. It is at this time that Fielding becomes obsessed with Sarah's ghost. He believes he is seeing her everywhere and that he is surely losing his mind. He begins to question his own philosophies and begins to lose his will to win the election. The film is an engrossing character study of two very fascinating people cut of completely different cloth. The non-linear approach used by Director Keith Gordon was both a blessing and a curse. Sometimes it provided important character development and motivation and at others, it jumped back and forth for no good reason. This often made the film seem disjointed and hard to follow. Gordon's direction was only fair, though he delivered accurate period renderings especially of the 1970's. There were too many instances of unnecessary stylizing. For instance, there was excessive use of monologue jump cuts, where he cut from the speaker saying one thing to the same speaker in the same spot saying something else. He used it so often that it looked like bad editing. In addition, Gordon tended to focus on the schmaltzy romantic angle and downplayed the far more interesting philosophical tension. He did give us some dialectic, but generally cut away when the philosophical fireworks were just getting started. He also kept treading over the same ground in different ways. This made the story drag. The acting by both leads was terrific. This film brings Billy Crudup and Jennifer Connelly together again, both having appeared in "Inventing the Abbotts". Crudup was extremely impressive as the tormented politician. This was an exquisitely complex character and Crudup flexed the role to the max. Connelly was a bit more uneven in her role, sometimes playing the role with great force, but at others with a mousy self-consciousness that was inconsistent with the character. Still, she gave Sarah great depth as both a lover and a crusader, and a convincing passion for her beliefs. This is an absorbing but slow moving romance that is a bit heavy handed, but nonetheless interesting. I rated it a 7/10. It showcases good performances by two young actors we will surely hear from again. Not recommended for impatient viewers.
Rating: 
Summary: It WAS terribly depressing...
Review: I have to agree that the presentation of this film ... the direction, the acting, and the cinematographic presentation of emotion and mood ... were high quality. BUT, the movie was a true wrist-slasher despite the effort it makes in the last lines to deliver some impression of hope. There are two kinds of sad stories: one that gives the viewers the cathartic release of tears ... and those that won't allow the viewer that catharsis. This is definitely the latter. No release, no closure, just a lingering aching loneliness one can't help but feel for the protagonist, Fielding. If you enjoy that kind of tale ... have at it. It elicits those emotions quite effectively through its odd plot and surreal style. The effect that the stories events have on Fielding are well-projected; I couldn't help empathizing with the mounting sorrow and madness that Fielding was obviously experiencing.
Rating: 
Summary: A Great Love Story!!!!
Review: This was a great love story. The actors picked to play the roles were perfect. The plot was great. I would recomend not only watching this movie but also buying it!!!!!!
Rating:
Summary: Intense and amazing
Review: For anyone who has been through a relationship which ended when you never wanted it to, for anyone who has loved somone "too much", for anyone who feels lost and is searching for the answers to unanswerd questions about WHY..this movie will hit you right between the eyes. OTHERWISE, you just won't get it. I thought it was intense and amazing.
Rating:
Summary: where is your heart?
Review: I don't understand why some people (such as the reviewer that didn't like this movie) can't just allow themselves to feel the sincerity and beauty of films like this. They have to sit there and pick it apart, and completely miss the point of the film. Sure, there are plenty of bad films that are badly witten, directed, and acted("Here On Earth," for an example). These bad films try in pathetic attempts to jerk some tears from the audience, while showing no sincerity, conviction, or real understanding of the human heart. Waking The Dead is NOT one of those films. It is one of the rare gems that you just have to open your heart and feel the powerful emotions expressed by the people that were involved in front of, and behind the camera. Any film could be picked apart if you try, but you'd have to be heartless and jaded to pick on a film like this.
Rating: 
Summary: An Embarrassment to All Concerned
Review: This movie is the kind of garbage you might find on the Lifetime channel. I was embarrassed for the actors who appeared in this gut-wrenching emotion-fest. Both Billy Crudup and Jennifer Connolly are fine actors, and anyone offended by mawkish sentimentality will wince at some of the lines they are made to speak in this in this awful, maudlin, frustrating movie. Billy Crudup plays a super-decent, super-caring, super-sensitive Democratic (of course--just one of this movie's many cliches) Congressional contender. Jennifer Connolly is his lover from some 10 years ago, who he believes has been killed in Chile rescuing people from a despotic regime. Their affair is told through flashbacks. They have long senstive conversations. When they fight, they don't really fight--they are both too decent to yell at the other. They just look hurt, and we *know* that this is a very meaningful non-fight. Naturally, he is a gentle lover; she weeps during sex. Everyone in this movie is terribly earnest, and LOVES to talk about what they're feeling. In other words: This is the Über Chick Movie! But then, when Crudup's character is running for office, he begins seeing Connolly...around, sometimes out of the corner of his eye, sometimes everywhere, a flock of her coming at him. It seems likely...likely that she's alive...or is it his imagination? We're never given a convincing reason why, if Connolly is still alive, she has been in hiding all these years, or how such a sensitive, decent person could justify doing what she did to him. If she isn't alive...then ole Fielding is hallucinating and is, therefore, a psychopath, and the whole idea that he could sustain a campaign, let alone get elected, is laughable. There is one remarkably inept scene in which Crudup's character Fielding is eating with Connolly, her church coworkers (two priests), and 4 Chilean nationals they have just rescued. One of the Chilean women confronts Fielding on his desire to become a politician, condemning him specifically for becoming an American politician, and we--like Fielding--feel the others in the room silently agreeing with her. Fielding explodes (but decently!), pointing out their hypocrisy, and how, despite the world's finger-pointing at Americans, it is OUR shores they so often wash up on when fleeing the terror of their homelands. Finally, he declares that he is "choking on the collective superiority in this room!" It is a good line, and he delivers a great tirade...but everyone (except, perhaps, the Chileans) in this movie is so darn nice, and good and wholesome, that we can't believe for a minute that they can't see Fielding's goodness, too. So their collective superiority...it just doesn't ring true. In fact, very, very little in this movie rings true. This is the sort of movie a 14-year-old girl wanting an adult love story might like; it displays precisely that sort of idealized emotional maturity. Few discerning adults will be able to stomach it. Even my wife (who is the reason I sat through it) disliked it. Do yourself a favor. Go rent a porno movie instead.
Rating:
Summary: Keith Gordon making the best unseen films
Review: After 1992's beautiful anti-war drama "A Midnight Clear" I was already a fan. Then in 1996 Mr. Gordon wowed me again with "Mother Night." So now with his latest film, "Waking The Dead," I wasn't surprised at all. He has done it again. I loved it! It's not that he's done the same thing again; he never does that. Gordon this time has made a beautiful love story with Billy Crudup, one of the most under rated actors out there. His performance is so powerful. I don't want to ramble on and give anything away about the movie. Just see it and discover the talents of the best unknown director of our time, Keith Gordon.
Rating:
Summary: A well-done, little-seen Sundance Beauty
Review: Waking the Dead sort-of disappeared shortly after it's first viewing at the Sundace Film Festival this year, and it's really quite a shame. Written and Directed by Keith Gordon (Mother Night), Waking the Dead tells the story of Fielding Pierce (Billy Crudup), a young man hoping to change the world within the political system. He encounters Sarah Williams(Jennifer Connely), a charity oriented, kind spirtied woman who hopes to change the world in spite of the system. The two fall very deeply in love, easily overcoming their differences. The tone changes, however, and Sarah dies in a car bombing while helping to assist a small country. We catch up with Fielding several years down the road, caught up in an important political race. However, somewhere deep inside, we see that he's changed, and haunted by Sarah. He begins to believe he sees her throught his world. Suddenly he has to decide if she still lives, and if so, what is he willing to sacrifice to be with her again. The performances are what delivers this film. Crudup, who's curging career resemlbes that of his character, nails the role. Connely, who shakes off her earlier acting criticisms, compliments and hinges the film. Overall, I highly enjoyed and really related to this film. It creates wonderfully simplistic moments, and carries you through what would be a very depressing film at the hands of a less talented cast and crew
Rating:
Summary: Waking The Dead was wonderful
Review: I loved this movie because it showed me something I have never before seen represented in a movie-- a realistic, respectful, passionate relationship with two people who have found their calling in life. I respected both characters, even when they struggled with various moral and emotional dilemmas. Especially if you are a social justice activist of any sort, you will feel connected tot the struggles these characters go through. Fielding wants to improve things by being a politician within the system, while Sarah seeks justice as an activist outside the system. I felt that I could really relate to these characters. Lastly, the realism of their relationship made their passion for each other and their causes even more beautiful.
Rating:
Summary: Superb, but as usual, less than the book it was based upon
Review: I read "Waking the Dead" a few months before watching the movie. I was thus certainly biased in a certain direction in favor of the book. Keith Gordon, who also directed the outstanding and under-appreciated films "A Midnight Clear" and "Mother Night", stays pretty much faithful to the original material by Scott Spencer. It's obvious that films are different than books and directors need a certain amount lattitude to change the story as needed. Gordon certainly left a lot of the story on the cutting room floor and that is, for the most part, not a problem. What is the problem is that Gordon didn't flesh out Sarah's story and, as a result, offers a skewed ending that the book doesn't share. Sarah and Fielding are not "opposites" as many suggest. They happen to agree politically. They're both "liberals." Where they disagree is on tactics. The problem with the film is that we don't really see enough of Sarah to understand just how different her tactics are compared to Fielding and why, ultimately, she chose to go away. The movie's ending is ambiguious about the fate of Sarah. Did she die or didn't she? The book shares some of this approach, but it strongly leans in the direction of Sarah having faked her death. In the book Fielding meets with a priest who states that Sarah is alive. And when Sarah and Fielding finally meet at the end Sarah explains how she is living underground and continuing her work. We're given, at least in the text, a reason why Sarah chose the path that she did. Gordon, however, mostly gives us Fielding's side of things. In the process he detracts from the central conflict and ends up with a rather wishy-washy ending. I strongly recommend this film. The DVD has many interesting extras, including many deleted scenes and a commentary by Gordon. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be anything on the DVD from the original author, Scott Spencer. That's too bad because I think he could have added some really interesting insights about the story overall. And of course, read the book which is, as usual, even better than the movie.
|
