The surprising, never-before-told tale of the indispensable yet unsung Casting Director - Iconoclasts whose keen eye, exquisite taste and gut instincts redefined Hollywood. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Tom Donahue
Starring: Jeff Bridges, Robert De Niro, Robert Duvall and others
Steve Rogers struggles to embrace his role in the modern world and teams up with Natasha Romanoff, aka Black Widow, to battle a powerful yet shadowy enemy in present-day Washington, D.C. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Anthony Russo & Joe Russo
Starring: Chris Evans, Frank Grillo, Sebastian Stan and others
After a collision with a shipping container at sea, a resourceful sailor finds himself, despite all efforts to the contrary, staring his mortality in the face. From: IMDb.com
Sometimes less is more. Sometimes a movie can just cram too much story and characters into one movie, which unfortunately is something this movie didn't quite get.
And that's all a shame really. By simplifying and minimizing its story, this movie so easily could have turned into a truly compelling- and maybe even tense one to watch.
But don't get me wrong, it's not like this ever becomes a complicated or confusing movie to watch story-wise. It just happens to be so that the movie decides to throw in multiple different plot lines and characters, of which most are going absolutely nowhere. It has too many needless distractions in it, that besides don't add anything to the movie its tension or mystery. The main plot line of the movie seemed fine and interesting enough to me on its own, so you could say this movie is a bit of a missed opportunity.
Perhaps some of the story lines and characters wouldn't have felt as pointless if some of the characters got instead played by some lesser known actors. But once you see Susan Sarandon you expect her to become a big part of the movie. And also for instance, once Nick Nolte shows up, you expect him to start playing a crucial part within the movie its story. Certain actors raise certain expectations but in all honesty, most of the wonderful actors within this movie play some very throwaway roles. This goes for the likes of Susan Sarandon, Richard Jenkins, Anna Kendrick, Sam Elliott, Chris Cooper and Nick Nolte, among others. It seems that Robert Redford (who also directed this movie) just has too many friends in Hollywood and wants to put them all in his movies.
Of course nothing wrong with the acting though. The cast-list along is probably already plenty of reason for some people to go watch this movie and it's not like this movie isn't worth seeing or disappointing as a whole but let me just say that all of the actors in this movie have been in far better ones. So don't expect too much from this movie, based on its cast-list.
Don't mean to sound too negative about this movie but it's always a shame to see some great potential go to waste. It's certainly still a perfectly watchable one, that unfortunately is just trying to do too much with its story, which not only results in some redundant moments and characters but also some poor developments, that already cause the movie to die down before the movie reaches its climax.
Can't really say I'm the biggest fan of George Roy Hill's directing
approach (even though he won an Oscar for this movie) but there's still
usually very little wrong with his movies.
Reason why I'm just not the biggest George Roy Hill fan is because his
movie don't really have a very distinctive or good style to them.
Throughout this movie I constantly kept wondering how much better this
movie still could had been, if another director would had done it
instead. For instance a director like Martin Scorsese would have been
perfect and could had turned this movie into a true masterpiece.
But really, I still can't claim there's an awful lot wrong with this
movie. It features a good story, nice characters and some great
performances by its cast.
Even though Paul Newman gets first billed, it really is a Robert
Redford movie. He plays the true main character of the movie and has by
far the most amount of screen time in it. He also truly gives away one
fine performance, as does Paul Newman of course. But has Newman ever
disappointed in anything? I don't think so! The movie further more also
stars Robert Shaw, as the movie its 'villain'. I actually at first
didn't even recognized it was him, he looks and sounds totally
different than usual, which is always the mark of a great actor and
performance.
What makes the movie further more special and great to watch, in my
opinion, is because it's a period piece. The movie is set in the '30's
but got shot in the '70's. So what's so special about that? Well, we
all known the modern movies set in the '30's and some might have seen
some actual genre movies, done back in the '30's but I believe that
'70's movie set in the '30's are a sort of rarity. It also has a
totally different approach and vibe to it than a modern genre attempt
has. It's focusing less on the visual aspects and it doesn't constantly
attempts to impress you with any of its period costumes and set design.
I don't know, guess I thought this was a refreshing thing to see and it
made me really appreciate the movie all the more.
But of course there also really isn't such a thing as a solid movie
without a solid story to it. It luckily is the sort of story that
leaves room for some fun, next to its more dramatic and serious
developments. It's a nicely buildup story and its very entertaining to
see how the plot slowly thickens and more and more different characters
start to get involved with it. There are multiple effective and
interesting developments in it because of that, especially when the con
starts to get more and more elaborate, up to a point that the viewers
themselves don't even known who- and what things are part of the big
con. Might sound confusing but it really isn't though. It's a pleasant
movie to watch, that might have a far fetched story but it never feels
like a completely unrealistic or ridicules one to watch.
This movie is another fine example of typical '70's movie making. The movie is however far from a '70's classic. The story is too poor for that and the movie overall lacks some action.
It's not that the pace of the movie is kept low. The movie is fast enough and its well directed and constructed. It however is a rare '70's lack-lusting genre movie, in which you're just waiting for a chase of gunfight to happen, that just never comes. It's of course not that I feel that every single movie needs to have some action in it but some action wouldn't had been out of place in this one. It's fitting and sort of needed for a typical '70's genre thriller movie such as this one.
The story is actually a pretty odd one once you really start thinking about it. It's rather simplistic, which also makes it far from credible and perhaps even makes it a bit laughable.
Yet the movie is perfectly watchable. Everything about it is very professional and its a well crafted movie. It isn't Sydney Pollack's best work but he knows how to deal with the genre. The movie has a perfect sense of realism, despite its weaker unbelievable story. Also nothing wrong with the cinematography from '70's big-man Owen Roizman. Also refreshing to see a '70's genre movie for a chance that isn't stuck in one place or city.
Robert Redford plays the main role of the movie well and he truly carries the movie. Also Max von Sydow plays a good and interesting role.
Really no must-see but it's a well made movie that's worth seeing.
(Review originally written at 25 March 2007) If you want to know all about the Watergate scandal but you're too lazy to read a book or watch a documentary, like 80% of the world's population, this movie is the ultimate resource to learn all about Watergate. The movie now has a perfect educational value now days, though at the time when it was made, the movie was made for different motivations, since it was all still quite fresh back then. The movie is of course the ultimate example of the power of the press but the movie is also most definitely about the power of politics. The story of the two reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein begins quite innocent but the further they dig into the story the deeper and higher they get, when they learn who are all involved in the cover-up, which of course eventually even leaded to the resignation of president Nixon. They are being triggered by the vague and contradicting comments people they call and meet make. They smell something big and they completely set their teeth in the investigation and their attempts to find sources and let people get on the record, with of course the mysterious Deep Throat as their most famous and highest ranking source, though this didn't get revealed until the time that deputy director of the FBI Mark Felt in 2005 revealed that he was the source they called Deep Throat, which before that remained one of the biggest journalistic- and modern history in general mystery. The story even becomes detective-like, when they step-by-step investigate to get the next piece of the puzzle, so they can get further with their journalistic investigation to uncover who are all involved and how high it actually goes. So in essence the movie often repeats itself with its events but yet manages to remain absolutely compelling and even exciting, due to the way of lively directing and also thanks to the fine acting from the many great actors that are in the movie. It's a political movie, meaning that it features lots of talking, names and difficult words. Yet the movie always remains perfectly good to follow, which is I think mainly due to the compelling storytelling of the movie. You can thank director Alan J. Pakula and writer William Goldman for that. And I'm not even a Alan J. Pakula but this movie is just one great and relevant classic. But also the fine acting definitely helps and gets the movie some extra flair. Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman are absolutely great together as journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. They are totally different characters with different backgrounds and ideals but yet they form a perfect investigating team. Jason Robards also plays a great role (Oscar win) and so does Jane Alexander (Oscar nomination), who's role isn't the biggest but still a very relevant one and Hal Holbrook is still the ultimate Deep Throat. I especially love how authentic the acting in the movie felt. The actors obviously messed up their lines at times, which forced them to correct themselves. I just love how they decided to keep it in the movie, to give it all a more authentic feeling. The entire movie feels authentic, also since it tells the story purely from the point of view of the two reporters. It of course also totally fits within the realistic '70's style of film-making. The movie felt with many long sequence's and uses authentic lighting and make-up. The movie easily could had been 3 hours long but instead the movie is a more acceptable 138 minutes long. The final sequence of the movie perfectly shows, in just one minute time, how all the domino's fell after the published story. A really great and creative sequence and ending in my opinion. The ultimate educational movie about the Watergate scandal and an example and inspiration for great journalism. 9/10 Watch trailer
Basically only thing that distinct this movie from other genre movies is its fine cast. "The Clearing" is a pretty formulaic little movie that is lacking in some tension but nevertheless is well enough put together to make this movie a perfectly watchable one.
It's notable Pieter Jan Brugge worked as a producer on most of Michael Mann's most acclaimed movies. His style of directing and storytelling is similar in many ways, although he obviously still has a lot too learn when it comes to storytelling- and directing a movie in particular. Perhaps next time he would also be better of using more of a style on his own, to give the movie its own identity.
The story is for most part non-linear and focuses on basically two plot lines. The kidnapper and his victim (Dafoe and Redford) and the victims family and agents, who try to get him back. It's an interesting approach and for most part it also works well. The movie however isn't made terribly exciting. The movie doesn't really ever gives a 'sense of danger' which makes this movie an interesting but also far from exciting or thrilling one to watch. Also when you're from the Netherlands you probably already know how this movie is going to end, since its based on a true kidnapping which occurred a couple of years ago, only in this movie with different settings and names. No wonder, since director Pieter Jan Brugge is Dutch himself. It doesn't really matter that much all though. I mean after all you also already know how movies like "Titanic", "United 93" and "Pearl Harbor" are going to end but that doesn't matter you wont be able to be grabbed and captivated by it. The ending worked well and was in my opinion the most powerful and effective part of the movie.
It's a shame that the story is most of the time too over-melodramatic. It provides the movie with some needless dramatic sequences which all feel forced and far from realistic. The movie is only 95 minutes short but it feels much longer. The movie also tries to send out a message about marriage values but this sort of gets muddled in by the too many melodramatic moments in the movie. This probably is also one of the reasons as of why this movie is lacking in some good tension and good enough realism to make the story and its style work out a complete 100%.
Normally I'm not the world's biggest Robert Redford fan but he was really great to watch in this movie. He and Willem Dafoe had a great chemistry together and their sequences together formed the highlights of the movie. Helen Mirren is always great in a movie and this movie is no exception to that. The movie further more features established actors such as Matt Craven and Alessandro Nivola. Top-notch cast! Definiatly true that the cast alone forms more than enough reason to watch this movie.
The movie should offer a few surprises and some more than enough other great things to consider this movie a watchable one. Don't set you expectations too high and you'll probably have a good time watching this movie.
The story set around and about 'Operation Market Garden' itself, seems like good enough material to make a good movie with. It however is a very complex thing when one tries to tell the story of 'Operation Market Garden' from every view point possible; Americans, the Polish, the Britts, Germans, the Dutch. This movie tells all of the stories of basically every brigade involved during the 'Operation Market Garden'. Sounds like a great and fair tribute to all those who were involved. After all I often hear people complaining when an Hollywood WW II movie only focuses on the Americans, as if they were the only ones who fought and help to win WW II. To those persons who often complain about this, I recommend them to watch this movie. They will have to come to the conclusion that a movie that tells the story from every point of view, is unnecessarily confusion, overlong and focuses on far too many characters and plot-lines.
The failure of the (over)ambitious 'Operation Market Garden' is a fascinating story. Had the operation fully succeeded, it would had ended the war before Christmas 1944. This movie does provide good information about the mission and the battles fought during it and the parties involved. Purely based on that this movie is a good and educational one as well. A movie however needs more than just a fascinating premise. There are several problems with "A Bridge Too Far" that make this movie a, what I would like to call, flawed grand epic. The movie is still big and uses lots of sets and extras but none of it really impresses since the movie tries to cover way too much of the story and focuses too little on the effects of the war on the characters. It makes the movie feel very stylized and not humane and realistic enough.
There are countless unnecessary sequences but above all there are way too many and unnecessary characters. The movie has an immensely impressive looking all-star cast but at the same time that also is the down fall of the movie. Basically every star of the movie is given just as much screen time. Sounds fair but it just doesn't work out well enough. The movie doesn't always flow well because of this and the movie focuses on way too many characters that remain too shallow, a direct result of the fact that the movie tries to cover too much story and characters. Sure, most actors are a delight to watch in this movie and they probably also are one of the reasons why this movie still remains a perfectly good one to watch. But just think about it. Were the Ryan O'Neal, Laurence Olivier, Liv Ullmann roles, for instance, really necessary? They add nothing to the story and you might even say that their roles only work distracting. They and many others, play roles in the movie, that in any other normal movie would had been an 5 seconds role but however due to the fact that they are being portrayed by big-name actors, the roles are far too much extended and stretched out. This really is the biggest problem of the movie.
A result of this all is that the movie also remains a pretty shallow one. It's just a documentary like observation of the events which occurred and it fails to capture any emotion or show the true horrors of war.
The movie is however a good looking one. It's pretty obvious that not all the money was just spend on the cast. The settings are good and the movie was filmed in- or directly around the places at which the events of 'Operation Market Garden' also occurred in real life. It gives the movie a certain bit of extra and adds some realism. The movie becomes nowhere exactly spectacular but there are some well filmed battle sequences that don't really impress but are good and memorable enough.
The musical score by John Addison is very good and makes the movie also very recognizable, unfortunately it was the only good and memorable score by Addison, at least that I know of.
Richard Attenborough's movies always have both hits and misses and that goes for this movie more than any of his other's. This movie has many misses but still the positive things about the movie make this a, still good enough one, to watch.
It still is the ultimate movie to watch if you're interested in 'Operation Market Garden', however if you like a good WW II movie that is realistic and impressive to watch, this is not a movie for you.
