I'll tell you something that a lot of people don't know... teachers make lesson plans around movies when they need an easy day. They keep them in their pocket when they feel a little sick, or when they were up all night watching the election returns or, you know, drinking and playing stupid games with the college roommates they still live with because they are single and having roommates is a little more fun.
This is one of those movies that I sucked the joy out of and used to teach the philosophy of the Reformation... but, you know, I tried to be the cool teacher and throw in some wire-fu action between stripping all the joy out of it for them.
We look at Calvinism and that philosophy... we watch the really cool car chase We examine the concepts of predestination in Christianity, we watch a shoot out. We talk about faith and free will... we watch a fight scene before moving on to the next scene.
Because when you are hung over in a class full of people old enough to know you are hung over, and some of which are probably just as hung over, you want a little wire-fu at work.
I don't know if they enjoyed it, but I know I did. And I know it's full of enough philosophical mumbo jumbo and long diatribes about religion to be able to use as a fun classroom tool.
Plus, you know, stylized Kung-Fun and gun violence is fun to watch.

Commander Lock: "Not everyone believes what you believe." Morpheus: "My beliefs do not require that they do." Characters are always talking like this in "The Matrix Reloaded," which plays like a collaboration involving a geek, a comic book and the smartest kid in Philosophy 101. Morpheus in particular unreels extended speeches that remind me of Laurence Olivier's remarks when he won his honorary Oscar--the speech that had Jon Voight going "God!" on TV, but in print turned out to be quasi-Shakespearean doublespeak. The speeches provide not meaning, but the effect of meaning: It sure sounds like those guys are saying some profound things.
That will not prevent fanboys from analyzing the philosophy of "The Matrix Reloaded" in endless Web postings. Part of the fun is becoming an expert in the deep meaning of shallow pop mythology; there is something refreshingly ironic about becoming an authority on the transient extrusions of mass culture, and Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne) now joins Obi-Wan Kenobi as the Plato of our age.
I say this not in disapproval, but in amusement. "The Matrix" (1999), written and directed by the brothers Andy and Larry Wachowski, inspired so much inflamed pseudo-philosophy that it's all "The Matrix Reloaded" can do to stay ahead of its followers. It is an immensely skillful sci-fi adventure, combining the usual elements: heroes and villains, special effects and stunts, chases and explosions, romance and oratory. It develops its world with more detail than the first movie was able to afford, gives us our first glimpse of the underground human city of Zion, burrows closer to the heart of the secret of the Matrix, and promotes its hero, Neo, from confused draftee to a Christ figure in training.
As we learned in "The Matrix," the Machines need human bodies, millions and millions of them, for their ability to generate electricity. In an astonishing sequence, we saw countless bodies locked in pods around central cores that extended out of sight above and below. The Matrix is the virtual reality that provides the minds of these sleepers with the illusion that they are active and productive. Questions arise, such as, is there no more efficient way to generate power? And why give the humans dreams when they would generate just as much energy if comatose? And why create such a complex virtual world for each and every one of them, when they could all be given the same illusion and be none the wiser? Why is each dreamer himself or herself, occupying the same body in virtual reality as the one asleep in the pod? But never mind. We are grateful that 250,000 humans have escaped from the grid of the Matrix, and gathered to build Zion, which is "near the Earth's core--where there is more heat." As the movie opens, we are alarmed to learn that the Machines are drilling toward Zion so quickly that they will arrive in 36 hours. We may also wonder if Zion and its free citizens really exist, or if the humans only think so, but that leads to a logical loop ending in madness.
Neo (Keanu Reeves) has been required to fly, to master martial arts, and to learn that his faith and belief can make things happen. His fights all take place within virtual reality spaces, while he reclines in a chair and is linked to the cyberworld, but he can really be killed, because if the mind thinks it is dead, "the body is controlled by the mind." All of the fight sequences, therefore, are logically contests not between physical bodies, but between video game-players, and the Neo in the big fight scenes is actually his avatar.
The visionary Morpheus, inspired by the prophecies of the Oracle, instructed Neo--who gained the confidence to leap great distances, to fly and in "Reloaded" destroys dozens of clones of Agent Smith (Hugo Weaving) in martial combat. That fight scene is made with the wonders of digital effects and the choreography of the Hong Kong action director Yuen Wo Ping, who also did the fights in "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon." It provides one of the three great set pieces in the movie.
The second comes when Morpheus returns to Zion and addresses the assembled multitude--an audience that looks like a mosh pit crossed with the underground slaves in "Metropolis." After his speech, the citizens dance in a percussion-driven frenzy, which is intercut with Neo and Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss) having sex. I think their real bodies are having the sex, although you can never be sure.
The third sensational sequence is a chase involving cars, motorcycles and trailer trucks, with gloriously choreographed moves including leaps into the air as a truck continues to move underneath. That this scene logically takes place in cyberspace does not diminish its thrilling 14-minute fun ride, although we might wonder--when deadly enemies meet in one of these virtual spaces, who programmed it? (I am sure I will get untold thousands of e-mails explaining it all to me.) I became aware, during the film, that a majority of the major characters were played by African Americans. Neo and Trinity are white, and so is Agent Smith, but consider Morpheus; his superior Commander Lock (Harry Lennix); the beautiful and deadly Niobe (Jada Pinkett Smith), who once loved Morpheus and now is with Lock, although she explains enigmatically that some things never change; the programmer Link (Harold Perrineau); Link's wife, Zee (Nona Gaye), who has the obligatory scene where she complains he's away from home too much, and the Oracle (the late Gloria Foster, very portentous). From what we can see of the extras, the population of Zion is largely black.
It has become commonplace for science fiction epics to feature one or two African-American stars, but we've come a long way since Billy Dee Williams in "Return of the Jedi." The Wachowski brothers use so many African Americans, I suspect, not for their box-office appeal, because the Matrix is the star of the movie, and not because they are good actors (which they are), but because to the white teenagers who are the primary audience for this movie, African-Americans embody a cool, a cachet, an authenticy. Morpheus is the power center of the movie, and Neo's role is essentially to study under him and absorb his mojo.
The film ends with "To Be Concluded," a reminder that the third film in the trilogy arrives in November. Toward the end, there are scenes involving characters who seem pregnant with possibilities for Part 3. One is the Architect (Helmut Bakaltis), who says he designed the Matrix and revises everything Neo thinks he knows about it. Is the Architect a human, or an avatar of the Machines? The thing is, you can never know for sure. He seems to hint that when you strip away one level of false virtual reality, you find another level beneath. Maybe everything so far is several levels up? Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time tells the story of a cosmologist whose speech is interrupted by a little old lady who informs him that the universe rests on the back of a turtle. "Ah, yes, madame," the scientist replies, "but what does the turtle rest on?" The old lady shoots back: "You can't trick me, young man. It's nothing but turtles, turtles, turtles, all the way down."
3.5/4
- Roger Ebert

Die Hard (1988) is one of those action movies that just gets everything right. The plot is simple but brilliantly executed, keeping the tension high from start to finish. It does not waste time with unnecessary filler, making every moment count. John McClane is a great protagonist, not because he is an unstoppable action hero but because he is resourceful, vulnerable, and constantly thinking on his feet. The script balances action and humor perfectly, making McClane’s struggle feel real while keeping things entertaining.
The directing by John McTiernan is masterful, making every sequence feel dynamic without being chaotic. The cinematography uses tight framing and creative camera angles to keep the audience engaged, especially in confined spaces. The way the film plays with lighting and reflections adds to the tension, making even quiet moments feel suspenseful. It is visually impressive without relying on flashy effects, and every shot is carefully composed to enhance the story.
The acting is top-tier, with Bruce Willis bringing the perfect mix of charm, toughness, and desperation to McClane. Alan Rickman’s performance as Hans Gruber is legendary, delivering a calm and intelligent menace that makes every scene with him feel electric. The supporting cast adds depth to the story without overshadowing the main conflict. The score and sound design enhance the intensity, with well-placed music and crisp sound effects that make every gunshot and explosion hit harder. Die Hard is not just a great action movie, it is a masterclass in how to make one.

"Die Hard" is an utterly compelling mix of exciting action and some particularly bruising violence and some surprisingly quieter character moments (the wonderfully written and performed radio conversations between McClane and Sergeant Al Powell are a memorable highlight). The chief villain Hans Gruber is especially well written and he is so familiar with police and FBI procedures he has been able to draw up his plans accordingly and this means he is always one step ahead of everyone else. The best thing of all about "Die Hard" is that it is actually a good film and not just another noisy and generally brainless time filler and this fact alone must surely single it out in this particularly competitive genre.

Hardened NY cop "McClane" (Bruce Willis) arrives at the launch of the new building where his estranged wife "Holly" (Bonnie Bedelia) works, only to discover that she's now started using her maiden name. Humph!!! Luckily (for us) this is just the start of his woes as "Gruber" (Alan Rickman) turns up with his well equipped gang intent on robbing the place of millions of dollars worth of bearer bonds in a complex and meticulously planned heist. The best laid plans, though, and soon the secreted "McClane" realises the dangers to himself and his missus, and so has to clandestinely manoeuvre himself around the incomplete structure trying to nobble the baddies and keep himself alive long enough for the cops and/or the FBI to show up. When they do, he soon discovers that but for the savvy "Al" (Reginald VelJohnson) they are all rather gung-ho eedjits. It's now a battle of wits between the two men and what ensues is action packed, genuinely witty and yep - it's definitely a Christmas film. Sometimes it's not so easy to remember why Bruce ever became famous at all, but when you see his natural charisma partnered here with an on-form Rickman (even if his accent has moments of madness all of it's own) and some suitably beefcake Eastern European muscle and we get some entertaining banter and loads of pyrotechnics at the denouement of an engaging thriller. Great fun!

**Die Hard's fresh take on action heroes, excellent directing and pacing, and explosive effects make it a near-perfect action film and one of the finest of the genre.**
Die Hard revolutionized the action genre by rejecting the muscle-bound action tropes of its predecessors and introducing a relatable fast-talking hero masterfully portrayed by Bruce Willis. Willis' John McClane receives more sympathy from the audience because of his everyman quality. McClane seems like an ordinary guy caught up in an extraordinary situation and is doing whatever he can to save his wife and stop the bad guys. This more conventional character makes Die Hard much more engaging because most viewers can see themselves in the movie. Mix in John McTiernan's incredible directing, Alan Rickman's standard-setting villain, and sprinkle in some Christmas music and holiday cheer for extra flavor and you got yourself one of the greatest action movies in history and the best Christmas movie of all time (Don't fight me on it not being a Christmas movie, please. Let me have this.)

One seized tower block, one sweaty vest and one big set of action cojones.
Based on ex cop Roderick Thorpe's 1979 novel Nothing Lasts Forever, Die Hard, directed by John McTiernan, changed the face of the action movie. Starring Bruce Willis, Alan Rickman, Bonnie Bedelia, Reginald Veljohnson, Alexander Godunov, William Atherton & Paul Gleason, McTiernan's movie went on to make over $100 million in profit at the box office alone. Spawning three equally successful sequels (at the time of writing), it began a franchise that showed that if done well, the action movie could be a dominant force in the world of cinema.
The set up is relatively simple, Willis plays New York cop John McLane who during the Christmas holidays is in L.A. to visit his estranged wife Holly (Bedelia). She works for the Japanese Corporation of Nakatomi, and currently she's attending the company Christmas party up on the 30th floor of the humongous Nakatomi Plaza tower block. Bad day at the office because a group of apparent German terrorists, led by the charismatic Hans Gruber (Rickman), take the whole building hostage: with one exception; McLane, who evades capture and launches a one man war against the terrorists.
What follows is just over two hours of high octane action, smart dialogue and technical smarts. McTiernan had already endeared himself to the action movie fan with the ball busting beef stew that was Predator in 87, a fact not lost on Die Hard's co producer Joel Silver, who clearly knew that McTiernan could smoothly shift the action from the Val Verde jungle to the urban jungle of L.A. And he did. Next was to get the right man for McLane. Richard Gere was first choice but passed, so the makers took a gamble on Willis, whose career was at a standstill after his leap from TV show Moonlighting on to the big screen with the likes of Blind Date & Sunset barely making a ripple in Hollywood. The rest for Willis, as they say, is history. McLane is an everyman hero, streetwise, even slobbish, but identifiable to many with his work ethics, desperate heroics and emotional vulnerability. Willis attacks the role with a hunger rarely seen from the big male earners in filmdom. During the two hours and ten minute running time of Die Hard, Willis as McLane changed the face of the action hero for ever; even making a dirty white vest iconic in the process; the latter of which couples nicely with the hero being bare footed throughout for a nifty bit of writing.
Across the board the casting is flawless, Bedelia is spunky and driven, a woman worth fighting for. Veljohnson as beat copper Al Powell-McLane's walkie-talkie buddy and only link to the outside world-is memorable because it feels real, he has his own issue gnawing away at him, but his exchanges with Willis keeps the humanity grounded as the carnage unfolds. Gleason & Atherton are wonderfully anal as Deputy Police Chief and TV Reporter respectively, while Hart Bochner as Ellis dishes out one of the best weasel turns to have ever graced a movie featuring corporate suit types. But as Die Hard resembles the great Westerns of yesteryear, much like the great Oaters, Die Hard could only be as good as its chief villain. As Willis' McLane ushered in a new action hero to copy, Rickman's uber intelligent villain set a new benchmark.
Snappily dressed, well versed and as charming as they come, Gruber in Rickman's hands is a villain you could quite easily root for! That's further testament to Willis' turn that Rickman doesn't walk away with the movie, both men are from different sides of the fence, good and evil, yet both are characters you can hang your hat on. Quite a trick from McTiernan that. Rickman is ably supported by the scary Godunov as right hand man Karl and Clarence Gilyard Jr. as the cold hearted Theo. Elsewhere the impact of Robert Davi & Grand L. Bush as the two cocksure FBI agents Johnson & Johnson (no relation) should not be underestimated. All the actors, of course, are indebted to the sizzling script by Steven E. de Souza & Jeb Stuart. So to is praise due to photographer Jan de Bont, who in collaboration with McTiernan, produces a camera work lesson for action movies, as the camera swoops in and around the tower, down elevator shafts and up tilt to roofs; with the fight scenes afforded a spatial sheen not expected in the confines of a tower block setting (the film was actually shot at 20th Century Fox's own 2121 Fox Plaza). Even the scoring from Michael Kamen and the sound tracking are of a high standard; check out the various "mood" uses of Beethoven's Ode to Joy from Symphony No.9 and Bach's Brandenburg Concerto No. 3 In G Major: Brilliant.
The 80s was well served by action movies with the likes of Lethal Weapon and Beverly Hills Cop proving massively popular. But just as Raiders Of The Lost Ark changed the game for action/adventure, so too did Die Hard. It's now the benchmark movie for action, a film that unlike Hills Cop & Lethal Weapon remarkably shows no signs of ageing either. It's no monkey in the wrench or a fly in the ointment, it's the daddy, and the one that all other action movies have to answer to. 10/10

***Big, dumb, fun action flick with Bruce Willis and a skyscraper***
RELEASED IN 1988 and directed by John McTiernan, "Die Hard" is the first of (currently) five installments in the Die Hard series. In this one New York cop John McClane (Bruce Willis) flies to Los Angeles to spend Christmas with his wife & kids. When McClane visits Holly (Bonnie Bedelia) at her company’s Christmas party a group of radical criminals take control of the skyscraper. Alan Rickman plays the nefarious mastermind of the operation while Reginald VelJohnson plays a cop on the ground that befriends McClane via walkie talkie. Meanwhile Paul Gleason is on hand as an exasperating police chief.
This franchise fills the bill if you're in the mood for big, dumb, fun action thrills. Don't get me wrong because a lot of work goes into making these kinds of films and it takes talent & genius to pull them off. I mean "dumb" in the sense that the focus is on unbelievable action rather than deeper themes beyond "genuinely good people may be flawed, cocky and somewhat profane, but they're courageous and never give up in the face of evil."
The Die Hard flicks are the natural progeny of over-the-top films like 1977's "The Gauntlet" where the action scenes are so overdone they're cartoony, but entertaining. There's a thin line that filmmakers must tread with these kinds of blockbusters because they can easily fall into overKILL, like 2001's "The Mummy Returns." Thankfully, "Die Hard" evades that ditch because it’s not too over-the-top and it offers entertaining protagonists & antagonists, amusing one-liners, worthy bits of character development and a compelling comic booky story.
While all five Die Hard movies are of the same action expertise, I prefer the sequels because this one takes place almost entirely in and around a skyscraper. I favor the wider location scope of the others.
THE MOVIE RUNS 2 hours, 12 minutes and was shot entirely in Los Angeles.
GRADE: B/B+

What can I even say about _Die Hard_? This is one of the most highly praised action movies of all time, and it has **actually earned that praise**.
_Final rating:★★★★ - Very strong appeal. A personal favourite._

Just watched this inexplicably for the first time, after having seen and adoring its first two sequels. As a teenager when this hit theatres, I never really felt the urge or inclination to see this at the time. Action films weren't big for me back then. Now as a father of a teenager myself, it's interesting seeing what's now considered 'a classic' for the first time.
This easily deserves its lofty status as one of the finest action movies ever made, especially of the 80's. Alan Rickman, now deceased, played with distinction one of the finest cinematic villains ever. This film--closely followed by 'Pulp Fiction'--is the most important work Bruce Willis ever made.
I enthusiastically hope that should someday Willis either leave this plain or decide not to make any more DH films that they simply put the franchise to rest. He was born to play this character. Anyone else in his shoes could never fit the iconic bill.

**This is one of the definitive 80s Action Films.**
There is no nonsense whatsoever, the plot moves along with such a pace that the viewer is not disturbed by implausabilities.
Bruce Willis plays the likeable "regular guy", who is forced bare-foot into unleashing mayhem and destruction, to perfection.
His brilliant opposite is Alan Rickman, playing the German villain Hans Gruber in such a way that you almost root for him to get away with his heist. Also, he thankfully dispatches the office sleazeball, Ellis, in a wonderful scene.
The bad guys in Die Hard are more likeable than their counterparts in other movies. They are allowed to be funny and charming, which is good because we as viewers spend a lot of time with them, so it's good that they are not complete douchebags.
John McLane gets to do what many adolescent boys wanted to try: to drop something off the ledge of a skyscraper or down an elevator shaft, and see what happens. But he uses an office chair armed with a PC monitor and a block of C4 and watches as it drops, then explodes, wiping out an entire floor!
Everything here is bigger and louder than other Action movies from it's time.
McLane drops bad guys and one-liners left and right, things and people explode, culminating in a grand finale that is as well paced and executed as any action sequence that came after it.
This film started it's own sub-genre, after it came not only it's own sequels, but a load of films that were described as "Die hard on a..." or "Die Hard in a..." Most prominent examples were perhaps "**Speed**" and "**Under Siege**".
This is entertaining as hell, it's a must-watch!

'The Big Lebowski' is entertaining.
Jeff Bridges and John Goodman are a fun duo, I even would've enjoyed this 1998 flick more if it was just those two for the whole near 2 hours. Everyone else on the cast is good too, amusing seeing Peter Stormare in a role like this - as opposed to one like John Abruzzi. Speaking of 'Prison Break', Jonathan Krantz is also in this!
The film starts like a house on the fire, I did find the rest of it - particularly the middle portion - a little (emphasis on 'little') less as the story is stretched out a tad, though all in all it gave me a good time and I'd happily rewatch it no doubt.

Fun, clever and engaging. Joel & Eitan Cohen's most iconic creation

**You will find this movie. You will watch it.**
This movie came out of nowhere! The trailer for this film relied on just one short scene of Liam Neeson threatening a kidnapper on the phone... and that was all we needed to be hooked! A basic revenge/rescue movie elevated by fantastic action, stunt directing, and Liam Neeson's delivery, all transporting this thriller into a believable reality. One of the best of the genre that paved the way for John Wick.

Your arrogance offends me.
It is proof positive that you can still have a basic and formulaic genre piece and the multiplex crowd will forgive it the sins of film making. For here we have a revenge thriller that is over reliant on a ream of contrivances? The kind that people scoff at when horror pictures not wanting to be serious get screamed down for?. There is also some pretty poor acting performances on show, the usually reliable Famke Jansen looks lost when asked to show emotion, Maggie Grace needs to go back to acting school, whilst some of the French actors on show give French actors a bad name.
However the true saving grace in the movie, outside of some serious revenge fuelled torture sequences, is Liam Neeson in the lead role of Bryan Mills. Charismatic and believable as a father hell bent on finding the one thing worthwhile that he has in his life, it's only here that Luc Besson & Robert Mark Kamen's uneven writing gets any sort of urgency to go with the tidily put together action sequences. Taken is an enjoyable film if taken within the context of its genre, and for sure the subject matter of skin trafficking is a noteworthy plot, but no one can surely deny it doesn't have a shallow core and honestly isn't giving anything new to a pretty stagnated formula...
By the by, the thrills ensure popcorn pleasing pleasures and thus it's rated as such. 7/10

Random viewing tonight, just wanted a slick and simple action-thriller and this fit the bill. Liam Neeson kicks ass and can see why his career in this genre really took off. The camera work was probably the biggest drawback (shaky cam), likely trying emulate the Bourne franchise or something. But entertaining flick that doesn't overstay its welcome coming in at around 90-minutes. **4.0/5**

Probably not good enough to have started the Revenge-Renaissance that it somehow did, but still a pretty entertaining time. _Taken_ does hit a lot of clichés though, and I mean, it starts hitting them right away. We're literally only minutes into the film before we find out that Neeson's lead character is divorced, and his wife has re-married to a decent, rich provider, but one who's bookish and could never take him in a fight, and that the present he got for his daughter is for an interest that she no longer has. But once we get into the action proper, it's pretty great.
_Final rating:★★★ - I liked it. Would personally recommend you give it a go._

Daddy knows best — especially when it comes to a mostly untrustworthy cast of Europeans — in this action film. Liam Neeson's performance elevated this from being forgettable. Otherwise, I kind of didn't care.

This is a very good action/thriller flick. It currently holds a 7.9 rating at IMDb which it certainly deserves. The few people giving this a 1 or 2 star rating must be disgruntled French people who do not like to see the French government officials portrayed as corrupt bastards (which they often are anyway).
I generally like Liam Neeson so the fact that he is in the movie kind of got the movie off to a good start already. In this movie he plays a real badass, I-kick-the-shit-out-of-anyone-standing-in-my-way, former CIA agent hunting down the despicable low-life that kidnapped his daughter. I really, really liked the role he played in this movie. He makes characters like Bourne look like wussy. Even I was surprised when he actually shot the wife of the corrupt French government bastard to get him to talk. That was just awesome.
The movie is pretty much action all the way. Well, it starts off laying the groundwork for the story and here Liam Neeson is indeed playing a fairly timid father that seems to be a bit out of his depth. Once he gets thrown into his right element he quickly casts of the sheep's fur and reveals the wolf (sabre-toothed) underneath.
This is really a textbook action/thriller movie. A very enjoyable hour and a half indeed.

One of my best films of all time. Apart from they made a second one, this a great movie! Liam Neeson trying to save this daughter, in France, from being sold to the highest bidder. An action packed film with good acting and great fight scenes.

Ok, yes - it's cheesy and at times quite nauseatingly sentimental, but it is also at times quite a touching story as two determined people who meet over a gentle meal of chemotherapy. "Hazel" (Shailene Woodley) - never without her portable oxygen cyclinder - attends a support group where she encounters the ostensibly recovered "Gus" (Ansel Elgort) who has turned up to support his blind best friend "Isaac" (Nat Wolff). They both have a certain disdain for "process" and a fondness for reading. It's that latter fascination that leads them to write to the author of their favourite book. They are surprised when they not only receive a reply, but the offer of an all expenses paid trip to Amsterdam to meet him! She has to convince her parents (Laura Dern and Sam Trammell) that it's a goer, and then off they go for a bonding exercise that introduces them to a Willem Dafoe who really does challenge their ideals. The story then takes quite a dramatic twist, changing the dynamic between the couple somewhat and it's at this point we start to sniff that sweet small of melodrama and the plot hits the heart-string tugging skids a bit. There's a degree of chemistry between the two actors and Dafoe also turns in quite well for his one or two scenes but the rest of it meanders just a bit too much. It's over two hours long, and there's far too much time spent on lacklustre character development. Everyone is easy on the eye and I didn't hate it, it's just a little too sugary for me. If anyone wants to rehearse my eulogy with me, do let me know.

The director might be soaring after back to back success. Interestingly, both the films dealt with writers, but the main themes were romance. He's just a two movie old and now the movie goers can expect eagerly for his next venture. This movie was based on the teen novel of the same name about a 16-years-old cancer patient.
Hazel Grace, who is battling between life and death is also a strong fighter against all the odds. When her mother sends her to attend the group therapy she meets Augustus Water, a fellow member. As she is being sarcastic, Waters finds an interesting character in her. A friendship develops and they spend more time together. Even knowing there will no future together, the relationship progress and how everything ends is the rest.
Usually cancer themed movies are called tearjerker films. Surprisingly, this movie's aim was different. Of course emotion strikes, but the story narration and character developments were the basic goal. Three-fourth of the movie was well told story about teen romance. The afterwards account begins with a twist which were portrayed in the usual manner. Like all the movies, kept sentiments in the last part. The last quarter was very predictable, but they avoided cliche as much possible.
‘‘Apparently, the world is not
a wish-granting factory.’’
The parents' role was kind of mysterious one, that diverts viewer from their anticipation. Interesting it also creates some doubts. Compared to the previous movie 'The Spectacular Now', Shailene Woodley looked completely different. That means the physical transformed to look a perfect 16 year old was amazing. Her performance as well gives an impression that the Hollywood's future Academy award grabbing the female lead is on making. At this rate she can do that like Jennifer Lawrence did.
As for the lead actor, it is a good breakthrough and expecting the same result from his next movie as well. This movie, which runs over a 2 hour was smartly sliced the contents and organized those on the right spots. Many had agreed it was a fine cinema transformation from a book. So you can try this, but be careful because nowadays most of the teens movies are overrated because of the overwhelmed teen audience. The warning meant only for the older people. I'm sure the youngster will love this movie, I mean most of them.

Good movie and give alot of spirits to all people who had cancer

Of course we watched this more than 20 years ago, but recently took it out of the library to watch again for a couple of reasons. One, it is ostensibly a holiday movie and we were watching a series of them. Also, a friend had just lost a loved pet and needed a silly movie to take her mind away for a couple of hours.
This movie fit the bill. It has several laugh out loud scenes, and mildly amusing material surrounding those scenes. The ensemble cast is fine. Catherine O’Hara is a believable mom and I have liked Daniel Stern ever since he couldn’t understand how a VCR works in City Slickers.
If you are one of those gentle souls like our friend who has difficulty distinguishing between cartoonish fictional violence and reality, you will need to look away a few times.
It won’t make the regular rotation of our traditional holiday movies, but I am glad we fit it in this year.

It has taken me 30 years to sit down and watch this film and I'm quite glad I finally did. I usually loathe kids movies, and the trails at the time always put me off - but Macauley Culkin is really quite a charmer in this tale of a youngster who is accidentally left at home at Christmas by his family. They have jetted off to Paris leaving him alone facing the unwanted attentions of two would-be burglars (Joe Pesci & Daniel Stern). Initially a bit unsettled, he is soon is his stride using just about every gadget (and critter) in their large family home to make sure he thwarts their thieving intentions. It's really all about the kid - and this one delivers well. The slapstick elements of the plot are designed to raise a smile, never to maim - even if having your head set on fire by a blow torch, or being walloped in the face by an hot iron might do longer term damage than happens here. That's the fun of it, for fun it is - it's a modern day Laurel & Hardy style story with an ending that's never in doubt. It does have a slightly more serious purpose, highlighting loneliness - not just for "Kevin" but his elderly neighbour "Marley" (Roberts Blossom) and it has that lovely scene on the aircraft when mother Catherine O'Hara realises that it wasn't just the garage doors that they forgot to sort out before they left! A great, and instantly recognisable score from maestro John Williams tops it all off nicely.

Love this movie. I was 8 when this came out. I remember being so jealous of Kevin, because I wished I could be home alone like that to do whatever I wanted.

Doesn't really work if you actually spend the time to bother thinking about it, but so long as you don't _Home Alone_ is a pretty good time. There's really no likeable character, and it's honestly pretty mean spirited, but sometimes that's what you might need to defrag over Christmas.
_Final rating:★★★ - I liked it. Would personally recommend you give it a go._

"Dead Poets Society" never endeavours to sweeten the bitter pill of disappointment or tragedy by playing to whatever cliched expectations you might have. Neil's father Mr. Perry isn't going to suddenly relent and admit what a stupid and selfish fool he has been and then decide to change his uncompromising viewpoint in relation to his son's disputed future. He actually becomes even more entrenched in his stubborn determination that his son will live his life the way he wants it lived. However, this film isn't content to end on such a desperately dispiriting note as Neil's tragic suicide, so it returns to the original stance championed by Keating throughout when some of his now former students stand on their desktops in an act of defiant solidarity and also as a final salute to their departing captain. They now have the potential to see life from a completely different angle than the rest of us because of him and that is precisely what a solid education is supposed to do. It is the precious gift of being able to think and reason and draw intelligent and well informed conclusions for yourself on any number of various subjects.

The (very absurd) point of view of the rich people about freedom.
The Movie is so pathetically formulaic that it makes you want to throw tomatoes at the screen.
The Horatian ideal, of Stoic-Epicurean origin, of a life enjoyed in the good it gives us, even if it is little, is here often repeated, inaccurately, as an invitation to live joyfully.
And it makes us laugh and reflect even more that it is observed from an "even higher" point of view than the already very high social class of the characters.

Robin Williams ("Keating") arrives at an all boys school where he is to teach them English. As you'd expect, they weren't particularly interested, but when he begins by telling them to rip up the poetry manual, and continues with an inspirational and vocational approach the pupils start to engage not only with him, but they set up the eponymous club which helps each of them to develop as a person. This is quite a task for the shy young "Todd" (easily the most effective performance of Ethan Hawke's career) and for aspiring actor "Neil" (a terrifically measured and sincere Robert Sean Leonard) who is struggling to reconcile his own desires with those of his loving, but over-bearing, father who wants him to go to Harvard and become a lawyer. This is a terrific character based drama with Williams on great form, but he features quite sparingly - the thrust of this potent, funny and thought-provoking narrative rests with the young men. Their ensemble effort exposes a myriad of layered teenage foibles from trauma to Tennyson; Shakespeare to sex (or sax!) - with well written and delivered dialogue that focuses poignantly and cleverly on their maturing personalities. This film is highly recommended.