Rating: 
Summary: Early Vietnam, puppets and spies.................
Review: I found this to be an emotionally moving film about the U.S.'s early entry into Vietnam. Michael Caine plays a British journalist who has fallen in love with not only Vietnam but also a beautiful Vietnamese woman, played by Do Thi Hai Yen. Brandon Fraiser is outstanding as a journalist who is really an intelligence officer working under cover. He does a superb job in this film. I applaud all three leading actors/actress in their respective roles. They give an award winning performance. The story is about the U.S.'s early intervention in Vietnam; about how two men, maybe really only one, are/is in love with a beautiful Vietnamese woman; and how Brando Fraiser is really a spy working under cover. Super acting, a job well done, many applauds......... Diego R. Rodriguez
Chicago, Illinois
Rating:
Summary: Great story of love jealousy & revenge & politics
Review: I don't know what's wrong with some reviewers who insist on black/white good/bad distinctions in human affairs and the movies about them. Anyway, this movie is less about communism in Vietnam than about the terror of growing old without love and the easy crimes people are capable of committing in order to keep that love. Caine is brilliant, as he often is, as the lonely old European colonial and Fraser (trying to change his screen persona) is pretty good as the brash young American CIA can-do operative who takes away the sole reason for Caine's miserable existence, i.e., the girl. Of course, their relationship symbolizes the larger context. Fraser's penchant to see everything he does as justified because he loves the woman and Vietnam and therefore wants to save it pretty well sums up a lot of the American attitude towards Vietnam... No, unlike other reviewers, I feel the movie, which is a very good rendition of Graham Green's book (and he was no com-symp), is insightful and moving. If anything, it is sympathetic to the romantic view of the American presence in Vietnam. Maybe to get the self-gratifying triumphalist message that they constantly crave, the people who insist on "us right-them wrong" distinctions in their movies should try to find the 1958 Audie Murphy version of the story, if they can find it--it's supposed to be a much more pro-American, "cleaner" version. Maybe it's a Hollywood-Commie plot that it's been disappeared so we can't see the "truth," once more (ala Rambo or The Deer Hunter or Full Metal Jacket), of how noble we were in Vietnam and how vicious those commie bastards were. In any event, the present film is a great rendition of a messy story about how humans, even if they are trying to do the right thing, will usually do its opposite. That's the debatable political part in this film--whether Fraser's character was right or not. Even more devastatingly, it's about how easy it can be for us to hurt or even destroy other people in order to keep what we have. The movie tells a good nuanced atmospheric story as well as informs us of larger moral and political issues, as the book did, and this is the mark of any good book or movie in my mind.
Rating:
Summary: A Superb Film & A Gripping Performance By Michael Caine!
Review: Rarely does a novel translate well into a screen production. "The Quiet American" proves to be the exception to the rule. Philip Noyce and his team have brilliantly adapted Graham Greene's historical novel about Vietnam, during the waning days of French colonialism and the beginning of American intervention, into a powerful film. The book was published in 1955 and foreshadowed America's war in Vietnam. Kudos go to Michael Caine, who certainly deserves an Oscar for his spectacular performance. The movie is set in Saigon during 1952. Thomas Fowler, (Michael Caine), a cynical, veteran correspondent for The London Times is our narrator. Fowler has "gone native." He has fallen in love with Vietnam and with Phoung, a one-time bar hostess who is young enough to be his daughter. Enter Alden Pyle, (Brendan Fraser), a seemingly innocuous, somewhat bumbling American who supposedly works for the US Economic Aid Mission, specializing in eye diseases. The two men meet and become friends until Pyle intrudes on Fowler's love affair. Tension builds as this triangle becomes more intense, and as the war between the French and the Communists is joined by a third party, a Vietnamese general, backed by the Americans. Fowler, who has long remained indifferent to the conflict is finally forced to take sides. Pyle is drastically transformed from a "quiet" American to a skilled CIA operator, willing to condone the deaths of innocents for long term political interests. This is an intensely passionate film. The love both Fowler and Pyle feel for Phuong, (played by the incredibly lovely Do Thi Hai Yen) transforms both men. In one scene, when Fowler realizes his potential loss, he says, "The fear of losing Phoung is more terrifying than any bullet. If I lose her, it would be the beginning of death." And it is a film passionate about the war being fought on the streets of Saigon and in the villages. Director Noyce is able to portray the conflict in simple enough terms without taking a strong political stance. This film is anti-war not anti-American. Graham Greene's haunting and elegant narrative comes to life here. The photography eloquently captures the steamy beauty of Saigon, the glorious tropical countryside, the serenity of Phoung's face in close-up, the chaos of a bomb-torn street and the horror of a village massacre. One of the best films I have seen in a long time. Highly recommended!
JANA
Rating: 
Summary: TWO SUBPLOTS FOR THE PRICE OF ONE, IN A VISUAL MASTERPIECE
Review: This top-drawer stunner comes with the single most powerful tenet any movie can boast -- the presence of Michael Caine. While ostentatiously presented as a (triangular) love story in the unpredictable times of war, the movie actually has the other plot, the vagaries of war and the betrayals that go with it. These two sub-plots run concurrently and meet at various axes through the movie. Thus giving rise to several memorable moments: a gruesome massacre scene in Phiat Diem, a bombing at The Continental which may even drive you to tears, a bunch of conforontational episodes between the two male competitors for the woman, and the most memorable, the two men discussing the younger's motives - Caine plays judge and jury with the simple act of reading a book. And then there're the memorable quotes: "There is nothing quiet in the heart that desires a love as unforgettable as a mistress" Caine, needless to mention, is suave and near-perfect as usual. Brendon Fraser too does well to hold up to his presence. The fabric of older man versus younger man is tighly woven into the story, and all the cast does well! I felt that the Vietnamese woman was a bit self-effacing, never quite making the powerful impact a person with her role could have made. But she looks sweet, so what does it matter. An excellent lesson in history; in the lives of South East Asians (not much has changed as far as life itself is concerned I guess); in film making; and above all, a moody yet elegant look into the idiosynchrasies of human and political motives. Thoroughly recommend seeing this movie!
Rating:
Summary: a very good job!
Review: Michael Caine is getting a bit shopworn, with the result that his Englishman is even more weary (and a whole lot older) than Graham Greene's. The girl who plays Phoung is perfect for the role: she's beautiful, she's unknowable, and in the end she's for sale to the highest bidder. The movie is worth seeing just for her. As for the title character, what can we say? The CIA guy is what he is, and Brendan Fraser does a passable job with him. The strength of Graham Greene's writing is that his characters have hearts of gold and feet of clay; it's fashionable to dislike the CIA guy, but you have to admire the purity of his motives, even while you're hoping for him to fall on his face. The novel's greatest weakness--that it hinges on an improbable bombing atrocity, planned by the "quiet American" and executed by a fictional "third force"--remains a weakness in the movie. It didn't happen that way, and I have never been convinced that it could have happened that way. But my greatest disappointment in the movie was its depicition of Saigon, which is shown as a dreary place of gloomy, film noir happenings. You'd never know from the movie that the city was called "the Paris of the Orient"--that it was a vibrant, colorful, and exciting place to live. Unavoidable, perhaps, given that the old city no longer exists, and that the filming was done in Hanoi. But sad nevertheless. Still, I hugely enjoyed the movie. It's actually better than the novel, I think, and of course it's a vast improvement over the 1950s version. -- Dan Ford
Rating:
Summary: At the edge of the abyss
Review: Crackling with tension from the opening scenes, this is an outstanding film. Noyce's team responds brilliantly to his direction in this tight drama about pre-American Viet Nam. The film captures the nature of the changing struggle as the almost invisible Viet Minh probe Saigon's defenses. The French, clearly floundering, are minimally represented. The war, the politics, the corruption are merely background to this story of desperate love. Yet all those subdued elements intrude on the three protagonists who must react to them. Love and war are a common theme in many films, but are brought together in this one with uncommon sensitivity. The Viet Nam conflict nearly tore America apart in later years. The time for this film is long past, but the way Noyce has adapted Greene's novel makes it enduring and pertinent today. Michael Caine, as the indifferent British journalist, provides his paramount performance. A superb actor in all his roles, with this one he assumes status among the very best. Given the power of his presence in this film, it might be expected that Brendan Fraser be overshadowed. Yet this rather bumbling character from The Mummy assumes a more confident stance. As the American intruder on both Caine's own love affair and the struggle to restrain the Communist forces, he fulfills the role with unexpected polish. Do Thi Hai Yen, the woman caught up in both the political and personal conflicts, applies a tender counterpoint to the many levels of strife displayed elsewhere in the film. Noyce's use of close-up in many scenes heightens feeling while keeping the characters as the film's focus. Greene's novel demonstrated how Viet Nam might become a morass of misdirected action. It was, he predicted, not a place for the clumsy. Fraser's role illuminates how prescient Greene was in the book. The withholding of this film by the studio was an error. Noyce's direction is flawless as he portrays the languid journalist becoming alert as he senses Fraser's presence is more than circumstantial. His boldly asserted simple-minded faith in America's ability to solve geopolitical issues by brute-force presence is a message that should have been heeded when the book was published. Hopefully, this film will again confront viewers with that clear message. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
Rating: 
Summary: comsymp
Review: First the good news, Michael Caines nuanced performance is wonderful and worthy an Academy Award. But The movie is seductive and draws the viewer in to it's mysteries right up until the end. Then everything goes wacko and you find out you've been had! The movie is symbolic, see. The movie is set in Nam in 1952, yes, not 1963, but '52. We have the evil effete French colonialists, but rather than fight for their colony, they would rather sip Poilly Fiussee in waterfront bistros and imagine that the rockets in the distance are fireworks. We have Phuong, or "phoenix". She represents Vietnam, itself, virginal and mysterious, forced to lie down with the enemy. She's the 20 something girlfriend of 60 year old Michael Caine, representing evil corrupt Europe, being as he is old and European. They fool around while smoking opium (the Opiate of the People, no doubt). We have the unseen Communists, but those commies are just freedom fighters fighting to remove the yoke of Imperialism from the People. They never do anything wrong. So who is the villian? Why it's the Quiet American, of course! In love with Pheonix, by day he masquerades as a Red Cross doctor making eyeglasses for poor Vietnamese, but at night he uses the plastic he makes eyeglasses with to make plastique explosives and blow up innocent women and children. He puts a puppet Vietnamese colonel in charge and goes after the innocent Commies and other noncombatants. You see, it's all symbolic! At the end of the movie you find out that it was filmed on location in Vietnam with much help and assistance of the Vietcong government. The Cold War word "comsymp" used to be used before the fall of the Soviet Union, but not much now. It means "sympathetic to communism". At the end, the movie turns out to be government sponsored, self-justifying communist propaganda. More credulous American viewers just shake their heads in agreement with it's whitewash. Just ask the millions of Vietnamese who moved to America after the war how benign the VC were. For a more accurate view of the VC, see "The Deer Hunter" or "Full Metal Jacket". However for most of the movie Caines performance makes it very intregueing. It's probably worth seeing, but watch with not a grain but a cup of salt. I guess old commies never die, they just keep grumbing, and rewriting history!
Rating:
Summary: Caine Shines in a Mediocre Movie
Review: This 2002 film version of Graham Greene's novel "The Quiet American" got its fair share of controversy by employing a topic politically not correct enough in a post 9/11 era -- America's involvement in Vietnam. In fact, the belated release helped the movie to garner more audience (and favour), which was good for it, as the transition from book to screen could be more successful. However, Michael Caine (nominated for Oscar) proves once again he still ranks among top actors around, giving a full-circle performance of British journalist Thomas Fowler who covers hectic weeks of 1950's clashes in Vietnam. He strikes an unusual friendship with American Alden Pyle (played by typically clumsy Brendan Fraser) and by the time the cards between the two are finally on the table, Pyle is head over heels in love with Fowler's lover, a beautiful Vietnamese Phuong (Do Thi Hai Yen). The later developments concern deeply political, business, and even marital and psychological matters. It's maybe too a complex mosaic to cover, which ultimately makes the film rather forgettable. The movie is potent in conveying just about everything it wants to, but mostly it only skims the surface. The potential of the novel is thus not fully realised, perhaps also due to the fact that Caine's acting outshines the rest of the cast.
Rating:
Summary: splendid
Review: It is a very grown up movie for grown up people. I actually liked the fact, that unlike other Hollywood movies, it doesn't offer the good guys and bad guys, it just tells the story whether you like it or not.
as for actors performances- this is what I call the higher league
Rating: 
Summary: Lame adaptation of a great novel
Review: I am astounded at the positive reviews this movie has gotten... this movie is so stereotypically mainstream Hollywood that it's almost like a satire of itself. There is no subtlety, nothing clever or new, and absolutely nothing to challenge the viewer. Examples: 1) The Voice-Over Narration - Throughout the movie we have Michael Caine spelling out for us exactly what is happening and how his character feels about it, just in case the audience isn't quite clever enough to figure it out.
A narrator shouldn't have to tell us, "I was surprised to find that I was actually quite pleased to see Pyle once again..." The actor should convey that information through his ACTING. 2) The close-ups of important information - We see about four different close-ups of a spot where Pyle steps so that, later in the movie, someone can observe that Pyle had visited Caine because he has some wet cement on his shoe. It's so obvious and overly set-up, they might as well have had Michael Caine's narration voice tell us, "Now, pay close attention to that spot where Pyle is stepping. It's important." 3) The lead actress has no character at all - Both men are supposed to be in love with her, yet she displays no personality at all, aside from "young and sexy," which isn't really a personality. Why are they both so in love with her? It's really painful.
Particularly excruciating is the scene where the two men are hanging out in a bunker together, talking about how much they both love her, and Michael Caine tells Pyle "I've recently introduced her to the music of Bach," like she's a pet that he's training.
If you like strong or interesting female characters, give this movie a pass. 4) The slow-motion running through bloody chaos with mouth hanging open scene - Yup. They have a couple of these. The worst one is after a bomb has gone off and we see Michael Caine running through the area, sobbing, staring at all the death and destruction. It's SO Hollywood and SO cliche that it becomes almost funny.
And then, just in case you still haven't gotten that this was a BAD thing, the next scene is Michael Caine describing the scene to someone else and we see the footage once again, as he describes it. Example: "There was a woman who covered her dead child with a hat. A man died in front of his family."
We get it, Caine. We get it. All in all, this movie has nothing to recommend it aside from some nice scenery.
|
