Reviews

...that the Bette Davis version of this film was better than the Kim Novak version.

Despite all of the other comments written here, I really prefer the Bette Davis version, even though the Novak version has a more coherent story line.

However: Davis' Mildred's raw emotions seem to me to be more apt to a sluttish girl who seems easily to become a prostitute.

And it is those raw emotions that constitute *part* of what the poor doctor falls in love with. He has emotions of despair, of failure, of "otherness" - strong emotions that he represses. Davis' Mildred, on the other hand, displays her emotions immediately and without censure. She has no feelings of despair, or of failure, or of "otherness"; rather, she is merely surviving as a poor Cockney woman in the Victorian era.

Novak's portrayal was a more vulnerable Mildred than was Davis', almost through the the whole movie. Davis' Mildred was **never** vulnerable until she actually had to go to the doctor and beg for assistance. And when he reviles her - for her method of keeping body and soul together, and for continually taking advantage of his love for her - she unleashes arguably the most passionate repudiation of snobbish holier than thou attitude ever seen on screen: "I wiped my mouth! I WIPED MY MOUTH!!" Novak's vulnerability was excellent. Davis' realism was monumental.

IMDb votes concur!

...that the Bette Davis version of this film was better than the Kim Novak version.

Despite all of the other comments written here, I really prefer the Bette Davis version, even though the Novak version has a more coherent story line.

However: Davis' Mildred's raw emotions seem to me to be more apt to a sluttish girl who seems easily to become a prostitute.

And it is those raw emotions that constitute *part* of what the poor doctor falls in love with. He has emotions of despair, of failure, of "otherness" - strong emotions that he represses. Davis' Mildred, on the other hand, displays her emotions immediately and without censure. She has no feelings of despair, or of failure, or of "otherness"; rather, she is merely surviving as a poor Cockney woman in the Victorian era.

Novak's portrayal was a more vulnerable Mildred than was Davis', almost through the the whole movie. Davis' Mildred was **never** vulnerable until she actually had to go to the doctor and beg for assistance. And when he reviles her - for her method of keeping body and soul together, and for continually taking advantage of his love for her - she unleashes arguably the most passionate repudiation of snobbish holier than thou attitude ever seen on screen: "I wiped my mouth! I WIPED MY MOUTH!!"

Novak's vulnerability was excellent. Davis' realism was monumental.

IMDb votes concur!

There was an orchestra in Auschwtiz - made up of female prisoners and led by another prisoner, niece of a famous conductor and composer. There were other prisoner orchestras in other areas of the Reich, but this has become the most famous.

This orchestra played for roll call - every day, in all kinds of weather. It also played for arriving trains, and during the sorting of those who would die immediately and those who would most likely be worked to death. The music lulled the arriving transports, either giving them a false sense of security or soothing their shattered senses with familiar strains of music.

This film is a documentary - a series of interviews and filmed episodes - of the surviving members of the Auschwitz orchestra. They tell their stories, and their memories of performances, and tell of their horror at being used by the Nazis.

It is a poignant portrait of a very special group of survivors.

This is an excellent documentary because it seeks the *current* place of Django within the context of Europe's Gypsey often reviled communities.

The interviewer goes to various Django festivals all over the globe to investigate the legacy and effect of Django's performance style and legacy in current jazz ensembles and performances.

He also seeks out the Django Reinhardt family in France - and documents the prejudice Gypsies still suffer.

There are discussions with great European jazz musicians, some who knew Django.

It's an excellent documentary and deserves a place in any serious jazz buff's library.

This is the first time I've ever left a film feeling sad to my bones. . I read the short story years ago and was moved deeply - but Larry M. and Ang Lee have fleshed the story out to perfection. . The film is magnificent - beautifully directed, beautifully acted, beautifully scored. There's not a false moment in it from anyone that I could see. . The beauty of BBM is that it is so utterly human: our very best choices when we make them can lead to suffering the likes of which we cannot dream. And happiness, despite its social ramifications, is frail: it must be held with care and nurtured, enjoyed even as it dissipates before our eyes.

...because I really enjoyed this film. It certainly does tug at the heartstrings, but perhaps I tend to over-identify with people who lose at love? Or perhaps it's because I love Tuscany? Or perhaps because I like the idea of buying and rehabbing a centuries-old villa?

I feel that Diane Lane's acting is superb. I didn't detect a single false reaction from her. And the other characters are also beautifully drawn - Fellini's inamorata, the Italian lawyer (fem.), and the Polish workers who work on fixing up the villa. The grandmother who comes in to help with the cooking is a perfect rendition.

Perhaps the only false moments came from the teenage girl who is in love with Pavil, the youngest of the Polish men.

Blather Blather... I really enjoyed the film.

Richbh

"Empire of the Sun" is a hallmark in Spielberg's career. The film is the story of an 11 year old boy who is separated from his wealthy parents with whom he is living in Shanghai at the outbreak of WWII... when Japan invades China.

Spielberg's camera is detached... we see what happens to the boy during his three year Odyssey into prison camps, betrayals, deep friendship, deprivations and insanity, but while Spielberg shows us all the physical details, he gives us no emotion: we are left to put ourselves in the characters' situation and interpret for ourselves how these people are feeling - or not feeling. The subtleties of expression are underplayed and add to the underlying tension of the film.

The cinematography is stunning - sweeping landscapes and crisp interiors. It seems that the entire film was show with a very small aperture - every detail is sharp and clean. This adds to the surreal elements of the film - stumbling through a rice paddy in the midst of a seemingly endless plain when, suddenly, brightly colored parachutes fall from the sky in the background.

The interiors of the prison camp - a bombed out train station which the prisoners have transformed (by slave labor) into a Kamakazi airfield, dirty, dusty, aird - the interiors teem with uncountable small items, screens patched with photographs, eating utensils, sunglasses and military gear... the accoutrement of deprivation and despair. By contrast, a stadium overflows with crystal chandeliers, deco statues, French furniture and a white grand piano... spoils of war.

The film is ultimately an haunting depiction of a young boy's courage and suffering in the face of the chaos and splendor of war - a film made by a director at the point of coming fully into his genius.

Highly recommended.