Rating: 
Summary: Magnolia
Review: The characters of this poingant film are each caught in their own tradgedy, trapped and struggling to find meaning, to find resolution, even to find life, and yet in the chaos of thier lives is an honesty, and an inexplicaple beauty. From Meaninglessness and coincidence become themselves a meaning. Paul Thomas Anderson has created a masterpiece. He uses fresh tecniques to tell a complex set of stories about sorrow, cancer and corruption, that instead of being depressing, is a life-affirming expirience. The stories are dark, yes, but not without hope, and not without humor. Many of actors adeptly portray fascinating characters, Tom Cruise in particular is a suprise with a fresh new style. I can honestly say, without reservation, that this is the best movie I have ever seen. Watch Magnolia. Its an expirience.
Rating: 
Summary: What a piece of crap
Review: Y'know how they've been talking about inventing special boxesfor your computer that would allow people to transmit odors over the Internet? Well, if I had one and I wanted to test it out on this page, the stink would drive me from the room...Yeah, people say the performances were good, but the whole time you're watching it, you're aware of the acting. News flash: Good acting is submerging yourself in the character, not showing off your chops. You're also painfully aware of the director and his pompousness. P.T., you're not Kubrick--you're not even Corman,..--so stop trying to impress us. Same goes for your girlfriend. END
Rating:
Summary: A Piece of Garbage
Review: How could anyone possibly feel that this movie is worthy of any stars at all? This is a piece of nothing, no-plot crap, and Tom Cruise should be ashamed of himself for portraying a disgusting, foul-mouthed loser which I'm sure feminists would love to take a baseball bat to. Was there really a need to have every other bit of dialogue contain at least 3 swear words? I hated this movie and it says something about the state of people today to think that this was some brilliant work of art.
Rating:
Summary: Magnolia
Review: The movie starts disjointed and I had a hard time following it. I almost decided after fifteen minutes to not watch it. My wife did give up watching it. I had a hard time following the characters until I was well into the movie. I've noticed lately, within the last couple of years, that my first response is not always my most long-lasting response. Magnolia grew on me for several days until I watched it again. Seeing the movie the second time was better because I already knew the story line and could pick up on small things. Overall, Magnolia is about living life in a very complicated world. "You may be done with the past, but the past may not be done with you." "It won't stop until you wise up." There are no guarentees but there are paths.
Rating: 
Summary: .
Review: If you want to see a long movie handling a variety of overlapping stories, with similar themes, and an equally impressive ensemble cast, but *without* the obnoxious camerawork, tiresome on-screen philosopizing, and intrusive moments of unforgivable stupidity, then see Short Cuts by director Robert Altman. That is very much how Magnolia struck me in the end -- a hipper, more wildly indulgent Short Cuts, with less of a sense of humor and a much greater thirst for grit and overdone metaphysical distress. If I had only seen tape 1 of the 2-tape film, I probably would've walked away intending to recommend it to friends. The cast of characters struck me as fundamentally fascinating. The performances were high-to-very-high-quality. The dramatic tension of the interlaced stories was tangible and gripping. Sure, it was all a bit self-indulged and generally unpleasant, but this could've been, based on just tape 1, overlooked in favor of the movies better elements. At the hour-and-a-half or maybe two-hour mark, I felt this movie had a lot going for it. But the movie takes a severe nosedive when the entire cast of characters decides to take "time out" from the movie in order to all sing along to Aimee Mann's hit single. What the F#$% was that? I couldn't believe my eyes or ears. 100% unnecessary, and utterly, unforgivably stupid -- irresponsible film-making at its very worst. Did Mr. Anderson run out of ideas of how to interconnect things? Is that the best he could do? "We'll have them all put their lives on hold and suspend reality entirely in order to pay tribute to the bad folk song that is used to shamelessly promote this would-be art movie." Wow. So bad! I could've done without P.Seymour Hoffman's "This is the scene where..." talk on the phone, if you recall that, (way too blatant), but for me, the "song" scene really was the beginning of the end, because things just get worse and worse from there. Problem 1 with the last hour of this film: nothing comes together. The threads only interweave minimally, and disappointingly, and certainly not as cleverly as all of the foreshadowing of the first half of the film would lead you to expect. The beginning of Magnolia, and the way it initially developed itself, led me to believe that things were building to an impressive chain of simultaneous "coincidences," a cacaphony of harmonious changes or some such. It SEEMED to build towards this -- the middle HOUR of the movie is non-stop tension, with important aspects of all the characters hanging in the balance. And then what happens? Nothing. Things lull for a bit and everyone sings a bad folk song at the same time. From there on Mr. Anderson chooses to substitute "weird" for coherence and genuine dramatic import. Don't get me wrong. I kind of like the frogs. It's bold and memorable. But that's all it is. It completely throws the context of reality in which the film was heretofore functioning. You could say "that's kind of the point," and the intrusive narration (who in god's name IS the narrator, anyhow?) would certainly like you to think that. But that's just too easy a rationalization. Given the *point* in the movie at which the frogs make their arrival, it just feels like an excuse for the writer/directors inability to pull things together (and get his "message" across) in a more skillful and satisfying way. It was fun to see but it gives me no further insight into any of the characters. A bold and imaginative move -- but an arbitrary and unhelpful one, also. That's another complaint. For as fundamentally fascinating as the cabinet of characters were, they change remarkably little during the course of the film. And the ways in which they do change are either trite, or generally unclear. Take Tom Cruise's character, as a single example: we find out important aspects of Frank Mackey's past, but never find out what it really has to do with his current personality. We see him break down in the presence of his dying father but are left to merely wonder whether or not this marks any real change for him. He seems to have changed somewhat by the end of the film but we never quite understand the why or how of it; I'm not sure P.T. Anderson did either. If he did, he didn't portray it effectively. Most of the other characters just sort of either ... "learn their lesson" ... or are left hanging in ambiguity. (Has J. Moore changed or learned anything? Has the Jimmy Baker character?) The characters were fascinating but Mr. Anderson seemed to lack the proficiency to explore them with any particular depth. The film's outward style attempts to convey the illusion of "depth" (through a lot of crying and depressing revelations) but when one looks carefully there is little to support this "atmosphere" of profundity. To conclude: Magnolia is a long-winded and disappointing film. It had a lot going for it and if nothing else, was certainly interesting. It's something to see if you're curious to see it. But I just think it fell far short of its full potential, taking too many easy-outs and leaving too much in the air. The narratorial "philosophizing" was cheap and intrusive, the characters left in a surprisingly underdeveloped haze, the dramatic tension ultimately tossed aside in favor of thematically trite weirdness, and the soundtrack repulsively employed.
Rating:
Summary: It's Not An Easy Watch
Review: There is so much to be said about this film... I almost didn't watch it because I had heard some bad things. Of course my curiosity won out and from the first scenes I was enthralled. Yes, these are whiney victims or nasty people. However,I was drawn into their characters and really did care about how things turned out for them. Brilliant writing, directing and performances--not a bad one in the bunch. I think this is a film you will either love or hate. It touched me emotionally and spirtually. If you don't get the same, you just don't and I expect you would be bored to tears. Special thanks to Tom Cruise and Julianna Moore for wonderful performances.
Rating:
Summary: What a pathetic WASTE.
Review: This is such a director-wishes-he-was-Robert-Altman film (with an utterly meaningless title), it's laughable. Following the pitiful, self-pitying characters through their tragic lives is dull, annoying and tiresome. Tom Cruise's terrible performance is totally embarrassing, almost as embarrassing as his haircut. But that's fine because he's such an overrated "actor" anyway. How so many good actors (Julianne Moore, William H. Macy, Jason Robards, Michael Murphy, Melora Walters, Melinda Dillon) ended up in this miserable film is beyond me...especially considering that many of them (Moore, Macy, Murphy, and Henry Gibson) have all been in Altman films, which are WORLDS better than this horrid bore-fest. The frog scene was just ridiculous, and the sequence where all of the main characters are singing along to one of the dull Aimee Mann songs was so trite I laughed out loud. What a dumb gimmick to try and relate the dismal lives of these characters, most of whom are living in self-created misery. Boo hoo. How is an audience supposed to feel sorry for people that have put themselves into such grim, pathetic situations? I just couldn't care less. Save 3 hours of your life and watch a *truly* brilliant ensemble film: Altman's "Nashville".
Rating:
Summary: Tarantino move over, there's a new Man in Town
Review: Tragic. Hopeful. Frightening. Optimistic. Brilliant! The movie starts with a simple seeming apologia of "coincidence" and the ultimate willing suspeension of disbelief that movie viewers are asked to apply each time they sit down to ingest a film. The thoughts and sentiments that Anderson wishes to convey with this sweeping opus take some time to develop. This outstanding movie has some dragging moments at the start, but make certain to watch carefully! Virtually every detail is critical to piecing together the entire story. In fact, you must view the movie at least three or four times to fully appreciate this young master's complex work. The casting is flawless with the exception of Cruise. His portrayal of Mackey is too over the top and his "star" image is distracting; however, the balance of the cast captivates. Mr. Anderson has graduated from the fluff of "Boogie Nights" to the pith of "Magnolia". True movie afficionados wait for his next movie with enthusiastic anticipation. Will he outdo Tarantino (i.e., build to a "Pulp Fiction"-like crescendo) or will he slide down hill like Ed Burns? Hopefully, the former rather than the latter!
Rating:
Summary: Magnolia is a tour-de-force.
Review: Magnolia triumphs as gripping human drama,some people think magnolia is one of the handful of true film masterpieces,there are some that say it's a crapy movie. Dont believe ignorance this film got voted as one of the best 3 films of 1999, and it also got an Academy award nomination for best original screenplay now the movie is out on vhs and dvd,now you could take your time and enjoy fine dialogue. I think it's an excellent film, enough about the movie let me tell you about the DVD it comes in 2 discs full of great stuff like deleted scenes, making of documentaey, and more Iam not going to tell you everthing its up to you to find out more or just go on and get the movie, by the end you will be happy to own Magnolia on DVD.
Rating:
Summary: Best night of sleep i ever had
Review: PT Anderson's attempt to become the next Stanley Kubrick,didn't impress me the least! This movie definetly caters toward the Hollywood elite with it's psycho-babble sub-plots and it's over-characterization of shallow characters. What a bore! I was waiting for James T. Kirk to pop-out of the wood work and give Tom Cruise some lessons on over dramatization. "WHAT is (pause) Love? " Additionally, I was waiting for L. Ron Hubbard to resurect himself and his psycho-church of scientology and convert us all! This movie reeeeks of any real plot, besides attempting to focus on the fears of human life, none of which is realistic. The only message i received from this lousy movie is to not recommend it to my friends. The tour de force ending,...leaves me to believe the director was lost in finding the finale. This movie has no focus, no life, no kidding. END
|
