Reviews

The film tends to fizzle out, like the bright lights of Hollywood for the main character, Bradford undertaker Richard (David Tennant), but the movie is still worth viewing. I enjoyed it, especially the drab lighting in Bradford turning to the neon colors of Los Angeles, Las Vegas, and actress wannabe Barbara (Vinessa Shaw), and then blending to black and white. The two don't stand a chance of working out together, but they do. The character development is shallow and much in the film is predictable enough to draw from it greatness, but the contrasting views (European and America, rich and poor, dreams and reality) give the film just enough spice to make this a good film. Vincent Gallo's character, Moss, is funny, and the cameo appearance by Johnny Depp is good--his poster eyes talk--and should have been played out along with Barbara talking with her dead father. (7/10)

With such an important topic, why does the dialogue and the acting have to be so bad. Who would waste the time to put something like this together; I'm embarrassed to have wasted the time to watch it. The actors must have been very hungry....

The film is a little slow in parts, unlike a good game of cards, but the acting is excellent despite the rather predictable outcome. An overall good film to watch and to feel a little what the gambler's drive must feel like.

Being a little rusty on the British monarchy, I cannot vouch for the authenticity of this film, but perhaps that is irrelevant to the splendid presentation of the queendom's past. A very fine film, probably even better on the wide screen (I watched the video). Allow me to state, "'We' enjoyed it."

and thought provoking.

Just maybe, I'm not me.

Even though Brad Pitt does a very good job in this film, it's too bad that he's seen for his looks most of the time and not his acting. He is good.

The film is enjoyable, and the techniques used to steal just about anything are entertained, but the chemistry between the two thieves is a little shallow. They try, but it just doesn't come off as real. Good acting, good story, nice pace, but the only sparks are from the fireworks on New Years 2000.

Though the acting was fairly good, there were just too many loose ends, not the least being how a man who is seen at the beginning of the film to have been hit head on by two different cars going two different directions returns at the end of the film without a scratch on him and dressed, nonetheless, in tails...it just doesn't work. And such an interesting idea to work with; what a waste. Brad Pitt fans will enjoy the film, nevertheless. Too bad; he can be good.

I was finally able to see the film on the last day of its showing. I'm glad I was able to, but it was a very moving experience and has left me exhausted and disturbed. I hope that I will be a better person as a result. It's a great film; highly recommended if it's not too late.

I did not read all 196 comments, but of those I did, I feel that many have missed the point of the close-up film technique. Undeniably, it is discomforting and truly makes one nauseous, but I feel that it serves a purpose: we are seeing the action not through our own eyes, but through the myopic ones of Selma Yeskova. We are feeling her discomfort and nausea. Lars von Trier could have taken it even further; he draws the line at the black-screen introduction and ending. Excellent control of the technique.

Furthermore, the musicals are pathetic...but they are not ours (aside from the relief they proffer our eyes). Instead, they give Selma her only release from the daily burden she carries. They provide her hope and strength.

An excellent film. I'm only sorry I waited so long.

There are so many loose ends (unbelievable situations) you could

fit a peacemaker in them. Fairly good acting and plenty of

action, but I just couldn't believe most of it--I can suspend my

disbelief as long as the next person, but when you come to the

end of this film and realize that you are not going to get

anything in return, it leaves a pretty dry taste in your mouth.

What are the ingredients for that peacemaker drink?

The story seems plausible, but the dialogue is below average. In

all, I found this 'romance' unappealing...something better

should have been done with the idea. What a waste. The

characters are not well developed and very little romance

actually makes it to the stars.

The funniest part (and this is not saying much) is that Linda

requires her father to deliver all her "Dear John" letters like

singing telegrams. Add one more of those and there may have been

something to look forward to every thirty minutes.

Rarely have I heard such a terrible narrative. The story line is 'washed out' and the dialogue is utter rubbish; it's totally unbelievable. I couldn't sit through the entire video in one setting it was so bad I watched another film in hope that something better might happen in the second setting: hardly likely. A total waste of time.