More like constant bore! 2 and a half hours of
preaching about how the pharmacetical industry
are making massive profits out of untested drugs on expedable disease ridden Africans.
An attempted tragic romance is used to try to hold the film together but their is absolutely no screen chemistry betweem Ralph Fiennes and Rachel Wiesz. After 45 minutes, I prayed it would end quickly but it just went on and on, I almost walked out! Over rated by the film critics, YOU BET!

Different strokes for different folks I guess. I am surprised to see TCG listed on a "10 worst list" because this one is going on my "10 best list" and may even be in my "top 5" depending on how the rest of the year plays out.

I thought this was an intelligent film that tried to say something. It had a lot of twists and turns and worked on many levels.

quote:

Originally posted by ChrisFromAstoria:

I thought this was an intelligent film that tried to say something. It had a lot of twists and turns and worked on many levels.

You have a point in that the movie did try to come across as intelligent but the plot was so wildly improbable that it made the "intelligence" look out of place.
Examine these improbables
1) A diplomat would get away with marrying an out spoken antiestablisment anticapitalist.
2) Weisz was potraying as a seasoned worldly wise campaingner when she was just 24!
3) Which major corporation in the world would fear what a 24 year old, who was well known already for her political slant, had to say?
4)An important document that seconds ago was under lock and key suddenly becomes available for Weisz character to do what she wanted to the document because someone was late for his son's cricket match, give me a break!
5)A 12 year old computer geek is able to predict
someone's password staight off the bat.
6)The said 12 year old could conjure up a forged
passport within hours.
7)Paparazi don't usually hang out in church and
yet they were all waiting for an exclusive occurance in the church.
8)The media would have been a much more available and obvious choice to break the story to the world.

As for message, yes there was a message and I got it about 20 minutes into the film.
It didn't really warrent 2 and a half hours to say what it did.

Yes horses for courses but this course had too many cracks for this horse!

quote:

The Editor Slacker
Posted 02 December 2005 03:13 PM
quote:
Originally posted by ChrisFromAstoria:

I thought this was an intelligent film that tried to say something. It had a lot of twists and turns and worked on many levels.

You have a point in that the movie did try to come across as intelligent but the plot was so wildly improbable that it made the "intelligence" look out of place.
Examine these improbables
1) A diplomat would get away with marrying an out spoken antiestablisment anticapitalist.
2) Weisz was potraying as a seasoned worldly wise campaingner when she was just 24!
3) Which major corporation in the world would fear what a 24 year old, who was well known already for her political slant, had to say?
4)An important document that seconds ago was under lock and key suddenly becomes available for Weisz character to do what she wanted to the document because someone was late for his son's cricket match, give me a break!
5)A 12 year old computer geek is able to predict
someone's password staight off the bat.
6)The said 12 year old could conjure up a forged
passport within hours.
7)Paparazi don't usually hang out in church and
yet they were all waiting for an exclusive occurance in the church.
8)The media would have been a much more available and obvious choice to break the story to the world.

As for message, yes there was a message and I got it about 20 minutes into the film.
It didn't really warrent 2 and a half hours to say what it did.

Yes horses for courses but this course had too many cracks for this horse!

1) A diplomat would get away with marrying an out spoken antiestablisment anticapitalist.

I've seen odd couples, such as the Republican and Democratic married couple who were head of their respective national political party campaigns. I've seen actors such Ronald Reagan and Arnold Scharzenegger become highly regarded political figures. I sometimes think that reality provides plenty of exceptions. As with diplomats there are enough patronage jobs going around that it is sometimes more about money and who raised more more for a political campaign than whose wife has the right stuff.

2) Weisz was potraying as a seasoned worldly wise campaingner when she was just 24!

I think that age just have much to do with it. Consider the movie Erin Brockovich. I think that many street-wise young people can be quite seasoned by the time they are in the twenties.

3) Which major corporation in the world would fear what a 24 year old, who was well known already for her political slant, had to say?

Think cigarette companies fear of insider leaks. Think of Watergate and some bunch of criminals getting caught and two Washington Post writers, one of them new to the job. It sometimes only takes one person in the right place and the right time to blow the lid off.

4)An important document that seconds ago was under lock and key suddenly becomes available for Weisz character to do what she wanted to the document because someone was late for his son's cricket match, give me a break!

Some of the dumbest and strange, luck coincidences occur not by strategy and planning.

5)A 12 year old computer geek is able to predict
someone's password staight off the bat.

Computer hackers are a plenty. Viruses everywhere, many of young kids. Sometimes, passwords just happen to be subject to personal behavioral patterns. Profilers do this all the time.

6)The said 12 year old could conjure up a forged
passport within hours.

Dito.

7)Paparazi don't usually hang out in church and
yet they were all waiting for an exclusive occurance in the church.

Princess Diana anyone?

8)The media would have been a much more available and obvious choice to break the story to the world.

Sometimes, the media have to consider realiability of sources and confirmation and the impact on its advertisers and legal issues.