Change Your Image
Ilsy
Reviews
Schlafes Bruder (1995)
Forget the film and read the novel!
I made the mistake to read the novel two days before i went to the cinema to see Schlafes Bruder. I loved the book and would have left the cinema after half of the film if i hadn't been invited (so i could not run away).
The story is completely different from the novel and i cannot understand how the author could let this happen - and helped working out the terrible script! It's really a pity. Vilsmair once again pushed his wife into the film, althogh there wouldn't be any part in the book matching for her. (I once saw Stalingrad from Vilsmair and was sure that i wouldn't see Mrs Vavrova, because i expected only men in this film. Poor me! Of cours Vilsmair found once again a role for his wife!) So the tiny, tender and silent Elsbeth, a 17-year old girl, is played by a thirty-year-old woman like a man eating vamp from the countryside. Ridiculous!
In the novel everybody admires Elias Alder for playing the organ in church like an angel. He plays the old church songs like no one did before and made the hearts of the people weak and happy. In the film he plays experimental music, he beats the organ like a madman - i think that the inhabitants of a small austrian village would have beaten him out of the church if he did play that way! I liked Eisermann and Becker, they are always good to watch. But it's a waste of time watching this embarassing movie if you like the book - and the book is really great!
A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
Boring stupidity
I've never seen such a boring, stupid film in my life before. If the audience wouldn't have started joking and laughing at the film all together, i would have never survived it. I never thought that spielberg could even be able to make such a bad film. Beware of it and spend your evening somewhere far away from this movie!
Der Engel mit der Posaune (1948)
a great austrian saga with historic background
This fílm tells the story of an austrian piano-maker family, beginning in the late 19th century and ending after World War II. It shows the fall of the austrian monarchy and the times of the two world wars included in the life of a woman (played by the - i think - greatest austrian actress paula wessely) and her family. I like the film because of the interesting story and because of all the great austrian actors. You really can admire the creme de la creme of austrian film- and theatre stars. For me this film is the last great austrian movie, because afterwards austrian cinema descended to harmless funny and childish comedies or cheap sex pics. It's a pity, because Der Engel mit der Posaune shows, how the austrian film could have been.
Gladiator (2000)
boring... boring... boring...
i cannot understand why this film got so many oscars. the story is really boring... nothing happens that is not expected. you know exactly what's coming next. the fighting scenes are dusgusting, and i cannot understand why one of the darkest chapter of roman history is celebrated as if it was great. the "panem et circenses - bread and games"-mentality of this period was really awful, but in this film you do not learn about the cruelty of people who spend their sparetime watching slaves killing each other - no, the fights are shown like great spectacles, and nobody cares for the poor lifes of the abused slaves. for the spectators of the film the fights are the same like for the historical roman spectators - just fun and entertainment. i would have expected more social interest for the incredible treatment of people. i must confess that i liked russel crowe, but i think most of the women do so. the scene when he found his wife and his boy crucified was really touching. but the rest of the film he spent with being brave, brave, brave... and over all hans zimmers music... i like zimmer, but i hate it, when every scene, every breath is commented with music. it's like a musical curtain all over the film, and i would sometimes prefer completely silent scenes. if a sad scene is written, acted and filmed brilliantly, then i don't need weeping violins in the background to learn: ah, this should be sad now! and the computer animations! did they cost more than 10, 99? if yes: you don't notice that! all in all: you don't miss a thing if you don't see the gladiator.
Schlafes Bruder (1995)
Forget the film and read the novel!
I made the mistake to read the novel two days before i went to the cinema to see Schlafes Bruder. I loved the book and would have left the cinema after half of the film if i hadn't been invited (so i could not run away).
The story is completely different from the novel and i cannot understand how the author could let this happen - and helped working out the terrible script! It's really a pity. Vilsmair once again pushed his wife into the film, althogh there wouldn't be any part in the book matching for her. (I once saw Stalingrad from Vilsmair and was sure that i wouldn't see Mrs Vavrova, because i expected only men in this film. Poor me! Of cours Vilsmair found once again a role for his wife!) So the tiny, tender and silent Elsbeth, a 17-year old girl, is played by a thirty-year-old woman like a man eating vamp from the countryside. Ridiculous!
In the novel everybody admires Elias Alder for playing the organ in church like an angel. He plays the old church songs like no one did before and made the hearts of the people weak and happy. In the film he plays experimental music, he beats the organ like a madman - i think that the inhabitants of a small austrian village would have beaten him out of the church if he did play that way! I liked Eisermann and Becker, they are always good to watch. But it's a waste of time watching this embarassing movie if you like the book - and the book is really great!
Mission: Impossible II (2000)
Boredom and action - a contradiction? Not for M:I 2!
I've never seen such a boring action movie in my life.
- If you laugh instead of being breathless
- if you think: "Please, be dead, so that the film is over!"
- if you look at your watch 20 times during one film
- if the romantic scenes make you yawn
- if you think: "Come on, stop the slow motion, so that the story can begin!" (and you think this for 2 hours)
then you can imagine the quality of M: I 2! Shame on you, Tom!
Anna Karenina (1997)
Very disappointing!
First of all: It's a great story. Incredible, how the author Leo Tolstoi describes the feelings of a woman who gave up everything (marriage, child, social reputation) for her love and commits suicide when she thinks that she will lose this love too. But the film is horrible. Yes, the pictures are good, but first of all the choice of Sophie Marceau was a terrible mistake. In the book Anna is, before she meets her later lover Wronski, a well situated lady with no personal conflicts in her life. She is self-confident, and other women come to her to get good advices for their problems with the husband, the children and so on. And then Anna meets Wronski, and her life shatters like glass. They fall in love madly, but this love is for both the worst thing that ever happens to their lives. It ruins both of them. Sophie Marceau isn't able to play this self-confident, cool woman. From the beginning she seems to be a nervous teenager, and so the drama of the story can't be developed.
There is also no passion between her and Sean Bean. I only felt very, very bored. It's a pity, that this great story was ruined, because when I heard that there would be a remake of Anna Karenina, I was very curious, because the book is one of my favourites. Unfortunately I have to say: Go and read the book! It's much better!
Rosemary's Baby (1968)
Frightening!
I read the book for the first time when I was fifteen. And then I waited about ten years until the film was shown on TV so I could see it at last. And it's great! One of the few movies that is as good as the book! You're always wondering, if she's right when she's worrying about her husband, her neighbours and her doctor or if she's just stressed because of her pregnancy. The actors are very good although I think that Rosemary's husband should seem more harmless than Cassavetes is (he's always a little bit too demonic).
And the end of the film is better than the book: you never see the child, you only see how Farrow nearly loses her mind when she sees the baby for the first time. In the book the child looks like a devil en miniature: red hair, long fingernails and little horns. I always wondered how such a goat-looking-baby should be raised up without the whole world watching it! Polanski made it better than the author.
AND ONE LAST WARNING: Never read the Levin-Sequel "Rosemary's Son"! It's the worst sequel with the most idiotic end I've ever read!
Dumbo (1941)
It's so touching!
I think it's one of Disney's real masterpieces. The little outsider with the big ears becomes a star just because of this handicap. It's a pity that everybody talks about "Dumbo, the flying elephant", so that everybody knows how the story ends. The most touching scene is when Dumbo goes to see his mother in prison: Although I know what's coming (because I've seen it several times): I always feel tears when Dumbo starts crying when his mother sings him asleep gently.
Judgment at Nuremberg (1961)
I think I've seen it 20 times
(First of all: My English isn't that good - I hope I can express what I intend to say. Maybe I've invented a few new words?)
Just two weeks ago I saw the "Reichsparteitagsgelände" at Nuremberg, where the Nazis celebrated their Military Parades. Spencer Tracy also walked there in the film, and so I watched the film once again the day I came back home. It impresses me every time I see it. The actors are brilliant, and the characters seem very realistic to me. There are no only-good-men or only-bad-men. Even the accused ones seem in a way like ordinary people, and I think this is the big unbelievable thing about WWII: That people went to their working place, decided about life or death of innocent men and women and went home in the evening to take their meal and play with the children.
I like the film, because it also shows the difference between the german people, if you compare the Burt Lancaster character with the still fanatic accused man and the servants at Spencer Tracy's household. The Marlene Dietrich character is also very interesting if you know that a lot of germans regarded her as a traitor, when she left Germany to support the USA fighting against Hitler. I don't like Maximilian Schell's acting as much as other commentators of this site do, but maybe it's because I only know the German version of the film, and maybe Schell isn't very talented in synchronizing his own voice: He always shouts as if he sells something on a market.
I have two problems with the movie: The first one is when Lancaster stands up in court like a hero because Schell is talking to Garland in the way the Nazis always did. In my opinion ths scene is to dramatic. The second problem I often think about is about the witness Montgomery Clift (who plays incredibly good): His character is so touching, and everyone in court thinks that his sterilisation was an act of cruelness - unless Schell proofs that Clift came from a weak-minded family and was weak-minded himself. And suddenly the opinion about his case seems to change. And this is something I can't understand. For me it doesn't matter if a person is very clever or a real fool - sterilisation is against the human rights.
But once again: It's one of my favourite films! And at last one tip for those who like "judgement...": Stanley Kramer's "Ship Of Fools". Watch it and think about which of those fools on the ship you are...?