Change Your Image
![](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjQ4MTY5NzU2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNDc5NTgwMTI@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
fdarcy
Reviews
Hearat Shulayim (2011)
The best Israeli movie of all time
It is to explain to depth the claim in the healine. As an israeli, I can admit that there are many bad israeli movies, but slso many good ones.
Footnote is not just good. It is amazing, and can be compared to any movie, not just israelis. It is smart, touching, played and directed wonderfully, funny and sad, and full of details and characters.
It is really one of the best portrayals of Israel and Jerusalem and its academic life. But it is also a humane and universal movie that anyone can enjoy.
Shake Hands with the Devil (2007)
A modern Schindler's list
This is an amazing movie. I saw the end of it some time ago, and I thought I will see a little bit last night (too depressing to see it all, I thought), and eventually I watched it all from beginning to end, without any ability to disconnect, no matter how hard and sad it was.
There are many compliments which can be given and were given by previous reviewers. I would like to add only one - the most significant achievement of the film is it's credibility. I knew some details about the Rwanda genocide, and learned some more later, and the movie is not only tragic and deeply moving, but also an extremely accurate detail of the genocide. As such, it should be learned at schools, as a reminder how easy it is to produce another genocide even after WW2, and how weak and hypocritical the world still remains, with the UN above all. The existence of few brave and true persons such as the hero of the movie cannot change this sad conclusion.
I don't know how many Oscars the movie one, but Romeo Dallaire definitely deserves a Nobel prize. I hope he will get it one day.
The Jane Austen Book Club (2007)
A brilliant and emotional film
I don't know if this is one of the best films I have seen. But this is certainly one of the most intelligent. films based on books (and I'm referring to Austen books, I didn't read the novel it's based upon) tend to be irritating, often insulting the original books and the intelligence of their readers. when the film tries to stay "loyal", in many occasions it is nothing but a poor shadow of the original book.
This film is nothing of this sort. Those who made it really loved and understood Jane Austen (and literature in general). Anyone of admires her books will find in this movie lots to think about. And still, it is also a movie, with beautiful and interesting characters, none of them is made ridiculous or flat.
Small movie, but worth every second of watching.
The Truman Show (1998)
The best movie of the last decade
"The Truman Show" is probably one of the most underrated movies ever. It was a success at the time, and it got some Oscar nominations, but somehow it didn't get the recognition it deserves. When I say to friends the sentence in the title of this comment, I usually get a reaction between laughter and astonishment. It is much easier to pick Scorcesa's movies, and to prefer De-Nero over Jim Carrie, that absurd comedian.
Why is this movie so underrated? One reason may be the identity of the hero, and the disbelief that the star of "Ice Ventura" can be part of a masterpiece. Another reason may be that people find it hard to believe that a film can be both entertaining, and funny, and light in character, and yet deep and sophisticated. And maybe the reason is the prejudice against what is "Holiwoodic". Whatever the reasons are, they are wrong. Truman is a movie that should be watched again and again, and to those who will do it, a very enjoyable experience is promised.
To make things short, I will skip the obvious details (such as acting, directing etc.) and move to the most important stuff, and that is: what was the movie trying to say. There are three levels of meaning in the movie. The first is a satire of the current media, predicting the current trend of "reality TV". This level is obvious enough not to discussed thoroughly.
The second level is a subject dealt with quite a lot in our era: the tension between "high" and "low" art, or between art and kitsch. While Truman is a film beautifully designed, "The Truman show" is not only a bizarre TV show, but also an extremely low-standard show. Anything around Truman's life is a kitsch, and this is a paradox which is in the basis of the movie. In addition, the movie brilliantly moves between the "inside" and "outside", between the atmosphere of the movie and of the TV series. Philip Glass' music has an extremely important part in that, making this movie an outstanding example for the importance of film music.
The third level is in my opinion the most interesting, and that is the religious one. The creator-created relations between Truman and The director, which holds the name "Chrostoph" are clearly of religious context. But it takes several views of the movie to see that these relations are really what the movie talks about, and are apparent in almost every scene. Many questions arise from that topic, and they are dealt with brilliantly, with the climax of the last minutes. One does not expect a light Hollywood comedy to be a deep theological essay, but that is exactly what "The Truman Show" is. Go and see for yourselves.
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
Worst possible
While the first two films of the trilogy where very good in my opinion, the third one is a complete catastrophe, in every aspect one can think of. Its attitude towards the book (and without the book, no one would have heard of Peter Jackson, except few admirers) moves between insult to ignorance - almost no text from the original survives, and the characters and scenes are terribly distorted. Even the climax scene is changed from the genius of Tolkien to a bad Holiwoodic cliché. The most disastrous is what the movie does to the character of Frodo, which, from the original tragic hero, becomes a stupid and gullible fellow, which does nothing (expect stupid things). The "go home Sam" scene, should be candidate to one of the worse movie scenes ever. Other characters, such as Denethor, Faramir, Aragorn, Theoden or Elrond, are either inconsistent, irrational, stupid, badly acted, or all of the above. In addition, unlike the beautiful design of the middle-earth in general in the first movie, or of Rohan in second, there is nothing left from Gondor, except one picture of Minas-Tirith and few fires. It amazes me that not only this film is considered "excellent" by many viewers, but that it is considered the best of the three.