CinemaLover

This has got to be one of my favorite westerns. It has everything you could possibly want for every movie fan. They're so many great aspect and I will attempt to display some of them.

The acting, what can I say about it. It was a perfect fit for Redford and Newman who are both friends in the movie and real life. They deliver exhilarating, funny and electrifying performance. It is so great I can't even put it into words. These two actors were robbed of an at least an Oscar nomination. It has to be the biggest Oscar snub ever. Watching this movie my only wish is that Redford and Newman would have done more movies together.

The writing was great and creative. I have never witnessed a movie that was so serious and yet so funny. The writing totally propelled this movie forward. The fact that Butch and Sundance went to Bolivia trying to outrun the law was hilarious. This has got to be some of the best writing ever.

The directing by George Roy Hill was as well amazing displaying the chase scenes and just sitting back and letting the writing and directing take over. But most of all he let Robert Redford and Paul Newman do their thing. You could see that they were both feeding off each other and George Roy Hill never seemed to interrupt their chemistry.

I would advise anyone and everyone to watch this. They are just so many laughs, many fun action scenes and of course Paul Newman and Robert Redford.

Unfortunately from listening to everyone else I was expecting some sort of masterpiece. That is not what I believe what I got. Yet it was still a very good movie.

The acting performances were also good but not great. Denzel Washington gave a very good performance but not Oscar worthy, it felt like I have seen this before from him. Russell Crowe just was not given the room to actually act. I wish Crowe would have been given more of an opportunity to show off his talent. Josh Brolin gave the best performance as a corrupt police officer. He displayed perfectly the corrupt cop blackmailing both sides for the benefit of himself. I do not really understand the Oscar nomination for Ruby Dee playing Frank Lucas mother. She barley even had a cameo in this movie. It is kind of sad to see how far Cuba Gooding Jr. has fallen not having much of a role in this movie.

What really kept this movie up and kind of brought it down was its steady flow and writing. It did show you some interesting things such as going to Vietnam and having a very unique and surprising place to smuggle in the drugs. Yet as I mentioned before the performances were good but not great because of the writing. I attribute this to the writing. Some of the writing did not allow some of the actors to expand as much as they could have on their roles.

Also the directing was very good but not great. Ridley Scott did show some interesting scenes and had good camera shot. The cinematography was good as well. Yet because the performances were not to great that brings him down because his job to guide arguably two of the best actors today.

This movie was a bit over-hyped but I would still recommend it. This probably could have received more recognition from the Oscars though.

I had wanted to see this movie for sometime now. I have finally gotten to see it and can tell you it is no disappointment. This movie had a particular touch that gave a genuine and authentic feeling to it. Ben Affleck has a way of writing about life on the streets in Boston that just grabs you. Good Will Hunting was a fine example of that but Gone Baby Gone displayed his directing abilities as well. This movie appeared that it could fall apart any second but yet the story held up and managed to get its message out. Ben Affleck seems to be very creative and knows how to get your attention right when he want you to.

I had not expected Casey Affleck to play as well either because there were so many compliments made toward his performance I expected something totally different. Yet he also brought this authenticity in his acting like Ben did in his directing. Youn could just see the look in his eyes that he was totally into it, he was it. He gave a great portrayal of a detective that should have earned him an Oscar nomination. Also a great supporting cast was put in place with Morgan Freeman, Ed Harris and Amy Ryan. All of them gave engaging performances as well. Amy Ryan especially with her performance as the mother of her girl who is the centerpiece of this story. I believe if it was not for her this movie could have very easily fallen into an ordinary movie.

What really made up the movie was the message. After all what is a movie without a message. This movie did not try to pretend to be deep or try to impress. It did what it had to do, asking the a very tough question. Is the right thing to do always the right decision to make and do the ends justify the means? I advise you not to miss this movie and definitely watch this with a friend or family member.

This movie seems to have a funny and interesting idea from the outlook. Yet this movies never quite takes off in the right direction or any direction. Through the first half of the movie it builds up as a comedy. In the second half it tries to alter itself into an engaging drama.

Personally I had no problem with Shaq and Penny Hardaway in the movie. Nick Nolte with his character fit perfectly. Still the writing was totally unimpressive and horrible except for the one scene with Nick Nolte at the end with his press conference. Everything else in this movie seems to be cliché and would not amuse anyone except for small kids.

The supporting cast other than the three basketball players and Nolte's ex-wife fit perfectly or should I say match the poor and cliché writing of this movie. For example J.T. Walsh was cast as Happy. Happy was in charge or at least had connections that helped Nolte get his top notch recruits with illegal strategies such as buying houses, giving money and buying other luxurious items for the recruits' families. J.T. Walsh seemed very easy to spot as a corrupt and horrible man even though his character is supposed to have a low profile and be behind the scenes. This presents a huge problem for a key character who does seem to be quite believable. He is supposed to be the man doing things under the table instead he is totally visible to the public.

As I said before the writing in this movie does not engage the audience because it doesn't take on its own identity. It is hard to call this a comedy with too few jokes and attempts to amuse the audience and it is hard to call this a drama with the movie trying to be portrayed as a comedy.

This movie could have been easily fixed if there was more work done on the writing and the casting. Blue Chips attempts to show the corruption in college sports but it fails to show the many aspects of it. Such as the corporate sponsors and the pressure an athletic director is under of loosing their job. It does not show the competing colleges vying for the top recruits and most of all it does not show you how such pure and genuine feeling such as playing a sport can be so easily corrupted by the pressure and the need for winning from coaches and colleges to fans and corporate sponsors. This sounds like a lot but could have been very easily included in the movie without having to overextend this into a 2 1/2 hour movie.

As I'm sure everyone knows this movie is about the war in Iraq. It shows 3 conversations between reporter and politician, student and teacher and two soldiers. If you want to understand what has taken place the past couple of years in the U.S. this movie can explain it to you very easily. It is not political propaganda like everyone likes to say it is a lesson about yourself and the decisions you make. It simply states that choosing do something about a situation is better than not doing anything at all. It does state that the war in Iraq is wrong but it does not bash it into your brain, that would be propaganda.

One great aspect of this movie was the acting. Great performances all around from Tom Cruise to Merry Streep and back around to the the director himself Robert Redford. Tom Cruise played so great he almost convinced me of what he was saying and I am a liberal. He played as if he was a politician himself. He seemed to be committed to the role he was playing and he to me was Oscar worthy. Merryl Streep displayed the problems of the media today. How they are hypocritical and contradict themselves, first going along with what the government says without questioning and then criticizing them. This movie shows that all that the news goal now is no longer telling the truth but getting ratings and money any which way they can, no matter if what they presents is fact or fiction. I think Merrly Streep role shows how T.V. and money have forced everyone to settle and cave into what everything the government has to say and there indifference to it. I found this to be the most interesting part of the movie. Robert Redford's role showed the problems that are occurring in this generation. He showed that the people from this generation are just willing to settle for what they have (sort of like the media) instead of taking action in some form or another. Whether it is protesting or even going to Iraq. It also showed that before the U.S. supposedly save the world from terrorism we need need solve the major problems we have here. Like education and making sure future generations won't have to deal with the problems we have today. There was also a conversation between Derek Luke and Michael Pena while they were trapped in the mountains in Afghanistan while trying survive an attack. I think the point of this part of the movie was to show that if we don't do anything to stop violence in the world hardworking intelligent people won't be around.

Let me start of by saying once again that this movie is not liberal propaganda. It does though say something about the war in Iraq though. For many of you foreigners out their I hope you don't think that every American is the way you picture us to be. They're some of us here who strongly disagree with the war in Iraq. Some of us can see that corruption is at its highest level in U.S. history. For other Americans who are reading this do your homework and look at what is happening in our country. Look I understand why people are saying that this movie is too preachy and find it boring. For that I have two thongs to say: Don't watch the movie or educate yourself better and try not to be fooled by what the government says. One documentary that could really help is "Why We Fight". This one is filled with facts so you can't really use the word propaganda with this one. Still what are you Europeans doing about it. All you guys do is talk and criticize America about how it controls everything. Before you criticize my country why don't you look at yours and see what they are doing to help the world become a better place.

I hope everyone understands that this movie is pointed at Iraq but it is mostly pointed towards ourselves. I tries to tell us that in any fight, war, conflict or event you need to try to make a difference even if it does not work out. Trying is the most important part of it. The ends don't justify the means. This points the finger at everyone who complains and does not do anything. It tells you to wake up from the idea that America is always right and never makes mistakes. Do something about it. Isn't that what people are obligated to, to support one another and to do what is right. So when you insult this movie you are not insulting the movie, cast or the director but yourself and what it is to be a person. When you watch this, get past the criticism of Iraq and look at yourself and think what am I doing to make this whole situation better.

It seems that many people dislike this movie and I can see why. First of all it shows that professional athletes are far away from being perfect. A lot farther than we would like to believe. The movie shows that many athletes as we know are just out their for the money. It also shows the corruption in the owners and politicians. But for me, all of this is good thing. I like seeing a movie that does not include glory in sports.

Another aspect of the movie was the cast. I thought the cast that was put together was very well put together. I was especially surprised at the performance of Cameron Diaz. I thought she played very well as the viscous and corrupt owner. Specifically in the part were she black-mails the mayor into giving the team money for a new stadium. Jamie Foxx also gave a very well played performance as the new upcoming quarterback. His role shows that he has become sick with fame and fortune and has seem to forgotten who helped to reach his superstar status. For example when he ignores most of the plays called in and decides to run the game the way he wants to. He reaches as point were he just flat out ignores everyone. For example he says: "I'm trying to win coach. I ain't trying to disrespect nobody, but winning is the only thing I respect." I think Oliver Stone shows that this is the problem we have in our society, that everything is about winning. His relationship falls apart with his girlfriend and seems to believe that their is nothing that could stop him. He almost reaches a point were he believes he is like a god. But, he realizes he needs a wakeup call or he will end up like the some of the people around him. I liked the way Dennis Quaid played as the long time starting quarterback who nearly becomes paralyzed. Now my initial reaction after he got hit was that his family would want him to immediately retire. What happened was the opposite, his wife wanted him to risk being paralyzed and brain damage so he can get one more contract although Dennis Quaid was trying to explain to her that he is worried about what might happen to himself. Or one of the confrontations between wife and husband when he mentions to her that they should put the kids to bed and the wife responds by saying:"Why can't we hire a maid?" This also adds on to Jamie Foxx's role and shows that the players are pressurized by their families towards good decisions and bad decisions and that the families have also lost touch with what is important in life. As well with Lawrence Taylor's role which shows the player-doctor relationship and the role that age and lack of education forcing players to push themselves over the limit for that last bonus, knowing after they retire they may not survive in the real world. LL Cool J's role as the star running-back shows that he no longer cares about the team or the game itself and feels threatened by Jamie Foxx because he has brought a new style of playing to the team and they tend to not agree with each other but above all with this new style of play may not let him reach a certain amount of rushing yards to reach his bonus. Again Jamie Foxx comes into this part of the movie at the end when he hurts his arm but does not tell anyone worried what might happen to his career. I think overall this show that their is too much emphasis in sports and I'm saying this even though I'am a big sports fan.

A very interesting part of the movie is the Al Pacino's role as the head coach. His ongoing fighting with Cameron Diaz shows the relationship between owner and coach. The coach wants to win games and have control of the team but the owner wants the money, the power and the credit for building a team. Pacino has fallen into a slump and doesn't like the ways are looking for the future of the his job and the sport. For example when he says: "It's TV, it changed everything, changed the way we think forever. I mean the first time they stopped the game to cut away to some commercial that was the end of it. Because it was our concentration that mattered, not theirs, not some fruitcake selling cereal." He believes the game no matters any more it is the money and this is what I believe is the main point of the movie. It is no longer the game that matters it is the people who put the money into it and this is what has been or what will be the downfall of sports or really anything.

I think that a good message through all these downfalls is that if you stick together and focus on your goal you will succeed no matter how big the obstacle, hence the title "Any Given Sunday".

After watching Becket I thought I was in for another classic. But it turned out to be on of the biggest flops I have ever seen. Unlike Becket the dialogue was filled up with imaterial and seemed to repeat itself

For example throughout the movie it seems that O'toole and Hepburn are in engaged in a major argument when suddenly it turns around into a love scene. I can recall of this happening at least 5 times throughout the movie. A second aspect to the dialogue was the relationships. The brothers were all forming alliances with each other King Henry II, Eleanor of Aquitaine, and King Philip of France. At one point of the movie I had no idea who was supporting who. For example there is a scene were all three brothers are conversing with King Philip, but each time one walks in the other starts to hide. Even King Henry the II walks in and suddnely it turns into a huge argument. Even in the ending provides no resolve to the movie when suddenly Eleanor of Aquitane and King Henry II resolve their relationship. I have no idea how this movie could win an Oscar for best screenplay.

Another disappointing part of the movie was the acting. The brothers other than Richard (Anthony Hopkins) seemed to be out of character and did not show enough expression. King Philip (Timothy Dalton) seemed to be over the top. But that I could with stand. The performance that disappointed me the most was Katherine Hepburn as Eleanor of Aquitaine (especially after winning an Oscar for it). She seemed to struggle with her British accent. She also was very much over the top and wasn't very convincing as a Queen. She was a serious mis-cast. The two acting performances that held this movie together was Peter O'toole as King Henry II (who probably deserved the Oscar) who probably played better than he did in Becket because he was required to and Anthony Hopkins as Richard who played vet good as the son with a true desire of becoming king. Other than these two great performances, this great story was turned into a inconclusive and enigmatic spectacle.

This movie is not your ordinary Hollywood flick. It has a great and deep message. This movie has a foundation and just kept on being built on from their and that foundation is hope.

Other than just the message of this movie the acting was phenomenal. Tim Robbins gave one of the greatest performances ever. He was inspiring, intelligent and most of all positive. His performance just made me smile. Robbins plays Andy Dufresne who was wrongfully convicted of murdering his wife and her lover. He is gets to life sentences but yet never gives up hope. In he becomes friends with Ellis Boyd "Red" Redding played by Morgan Freeman. Freeman who gives the finest performance of his career has unlike Robbins lost hope. He is in deep regret of the crime that he committed. His way of deflecting the pain away is by trying to not feel anything at all. With his friendship with Andy he learns that without our hopes and dreams we have nothing. Andy also becomes friends with the rest of Red's group. James Whitmore also gave a great performance as Brooks Halten who gets out of prison parole but in the words of Red he has been "institutionalized".

The directing by Frank Darabont was just magnificent. He kept this movie at a great steady pace along with the writing and great cinematography. He portrayed prison life in such a horrifying way, but not in terms of the physical pain but the stress and pain that wares mentally on the inmates, some of which deserve a second chance.

Whatever you do, don't listen to the people who say this movie is overrated because this is one of the most inspiring and greatest movies ever. It has everything you could possibly want.