The Life Before Her Eyes Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1920x800 | 8137.07 MiB | 1080p | |
|
1280x528 | 4478.22 MiB | 720p | |
|
696x284 | 701.94 MiB | divx | |
|
320x144 | 361.63 MiB | ipod | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
Diana's life is not what it seems.
Your life can change in an instant. That instant can last forever.
A dramatic thriller about Diana, a suburban wife and mother who begins to question her seemingly perfect life—and perhaps her sanity—on the 15th anniversary of a tragic high school shooting that took the life of her best friend. In flashbacks, Diana is a vibrant high schooler who, with her shy best friend Maureen, plot typical teenage strategies—cutting class, fantasizing about boys—and vow to leave their sleepy suburb at the first opportunity. The older Diana, however, is haunted by the increasingly strained relationship she had with Maureen as day of the school shooting approached. These memories disrupt the idyllic life she's now leading with her professor husband Paul and their young daughter Emma. As older Diana's life begins to unravel and younger Diana gets closer and closer to the fatal day, a deeper mystery slowly unravels.
| Uma Thurman | Diana McFee |
| Evan Rachel Wood | Young Diana |
| Sherman Alpert | Professor |
| J.T. Arbogast | Male Reporter |
| Zachary Booth | Boy Swimming |
| Ben Bringles | Funeral Attendee/Extra |
| Tom Carney | Lecture attendee |
| Adam Chanler-Berat | Ryan Haswhip |
| Tanner Cohen | Nate |
| Peter Conboy | Professor attending lecture |
| Pierce Cravens | Teenage Usher |
| Brett Cullen | Paul McFee |
| Alexander Fagan | Student |
| Vadim Perelman |
7.10 out of 10 (313 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Too hollywoodish - all glossy and no real, deep feelings.
posted on 17 Jul 2009I liked very much the previous movie by the director, "The House of Sand and Fog", but this one is below average. First of all, there is a question of how credible the main characters' behavior is in the extraordinary circumstances. One thing for sure, no "columbine-style" killer walks and talks like this - too polished and cool, like an actor in a western. And no victim behaves the way those two girls did, that is a fact. Also, many factual mistakes, for example the modern style flat screen computer terminals existed in 1992? The bottom line is, the movie appears as a lame attempt by Hollywood to play on viewers' emotions, but fails miserably.. It does not deliver the goods, as there is only a very little credibility for the characters, for their dialogs, and for the actual events. In short, it is a bit painful to watch, as the movie falls apart in many places.
Saw film at AFI
posted on 29 Jun 2009I saw this film at the AFI International Film Festival in Dallas. This film brought about every single emotion that I think one could have. I cried, laughed and was completely terrified. The film had me examine every little thing that could possibly make me understand the outcome. I haven't seen a film of this caliber in a long time. I was shaking and felt my heart pounding at various points in the film. I am amazed with the director Vadmir who did House of Sand and Fog. He has a unique style of bringing about various elements to convey his message. The cinematography was beautiful and the score was fabulous. James Horner that has done many different works can add another spectacular masterpiece to his list of credits. Eva Ammuri is beautiful and plays a role that is unlike any role anyone has seen from her. Evan Rachel Wood gives another emotional nail biting performance of a troubled teen. She was phenomenal in Thirteen and has come into her own as an adult for the role of Diane. Uma Thurman has never looked better than she did in this film. Young Gabrielle Brennan is the next Dakota Fanning and is a joy to speak with. She has such a wit about her and open to what life has to offer. I can't stop raving about this film as I am completely blown away by the talent and film. The story hits home for so many people and everyone can gain something from it. I can not wait to see it again as I want to re-watch and look for things I missed the first time. Go see the film, it is well worth the 1.5 hours and will have you on the edge of your seat.
Awesome start, but was there an ending?
posted on 23 Jun 2009I first started watching this movie and I thought the idea was awesome! It sounded like a great movie to watch as well, however the ending left me quite confused. After about an hour I was looking for this movie to end.. another 35 minutes later it finally did.First off, the bathroom scene where the two girls are faced with the decision of who would die put me at the edge of my seat, the first time they showed it. By the 10th time I was forced to see this scene I was ready to shoot myself. I understand putting emphasis on something but you don't have to show the same thing over and over and showing 5 extra seconds each time. Once you saw it the first time I would rather they just went back to different parts of the scene rather than showing the whole thing again.I completely understood the whole flash back thing. It was not hard to follow in that respect. although once it got towards the ending it was very confusing. I couldn't tell if the older Diana was seeing things and making it up in her mind, or if she was replaying her life as if she had been the one shot instead of her friend, or maybe if she was dead the whole time and it only lets you onto that fact at the end or something else I completely missed.I still have no clue what went on in the last 30 minutes of this movie. Like I just mentioned, I have many possible ideas but Im not sure of which one to go with. Was her daughter even alive? What were the crosses in the field that she stumbled upon when she was younger and why was her daughters name on one of them? Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention. I don't know.I gave this movie a 5/10 because without the last 30 minutes it was an awesome movie. Now if the ending didn't seem like they ran out of budget or patience with the movie and put some more thought or planning into it then I would so recommend this to watch.So, if anyone could send me a private message to fill me in on the ending and try to explain what the heck went on I would greatly appreciate it.. :]
knockout impressive movie
posted on 11 Jun 2009Just saw this in Kiev without knowing a thing (except it was in English) because Evan Rachel Wood is a great actress and going to be a major star. This has all the tension and nail-biting suspense of Rukrainian Vadim's House of Sand + Fog- too much considering the subject. Wood made her bones in this movie- being erotic, sharp, deep, beautiful, wounded, terrified in utterly effortless and unaffected acting. Uma is not my favorite actress- showing the deeply neurotic side of her that I think is real, but it works perfectly in this movie- as she displays the PTSD that every person back from Iraq knows too well. The parallel track of what is going on with her wanton, wild, and maybe damaged daughter adds more tension- has the poison of that event somehow soaked into her daughter? The cinematography is excellent as it charts the deep feelings between 2 best girlfriends, and the mystical internal turmoil over time and memory, now and then, real and illusion.My only problem is that I know this subject intimately - I reviewed the book Copycat Effect: http://hammernews.com/copycateffect.htm , which proves that almost any publicity about these mass shootings causes kids and adults to reenact them, usually on anniversaries of previous events. "Eyes" showed the shootings again and again in lovingly graphic detail and I don't think this subject should get any major movie play- it's just too dangerous. See if, in a couple of years, some schoolyard shooter doesn't say he saw this movie 20 times.
Great for the ones who did not get confused, vice versa for the ones who got confused!
posted on 12 May 2009A dramatic thriller about Diana, a suburban wife and mother who begins to question her seemingly perfect life,and perhaps her sanity--on the 15th anniversary of a tragic high school shooting. In flashbacks, Diana is a vibrant high school student who, with her shy best friend Maureen, plot typical teenage strategies,cutting class, fantasizing about boys and vow to leave their sleepy suburb at the first opportunity. The older Diana, however, is haunted by the increasingly strained relationship she had with Maureen as day of the school shooting approached. These memories disrupt the idyllic life she's now leading with her professor husband Paul and their young daughter Emma. As older Diana's life begins to unravel and younger Diana gets closer and closer to the fatal day, a deeper mystery slowly unravels. Okay, if the viewers exactly understand the movie, the movie would be a fantastic one for them. And the ones who did confused (possible in most cases), would hardly love the movie. Its cent percent sure that if the viewer understands the movie, it would be an amazing movie. Yes, the concept is beyond our imagination & in the end, we get to see a great shock (of course for the ones who were not confused). But unfortunately, the screenplay of the movie is in such a way that, most of the viewers would definitely be confused. Its complicated. But the screenplay is actually perfect. Not really the kind of a movie we usually see. The direction is good, although many questions regarding the story can be asked. The performances are great, by both of the lead actress. Uma Thurman looks beautiful & performs very well. Same goes with Evan. A movie, that may be a complicated one, for the commercial movie lovers. A nice attempt.
Genre: Women's film. Audience: Everybody.
posted on 02 May 2009The closing night film at the just-concluded 2008 Phoenix Film Festival was as wonderful as its opener, "The Visitor." "The Life Before Her Eyes" was directed by Vadim Perelman, from an adapted screenplay based on the novel of the same name by Laura Kasischke. (Perelman directed the moving, tragic "House of Sand and Fog," released in 2003, which we raved about at the time.) "Before Her Eyes," like last year's Sandra Bullock vehicle "Premonition," is what I call a women's film--which is decidedly not the same thing as a chick flick. It's a serious look at issues women face, through a woman's eyes, from women's perspectives. That's not to say men won't like and be thoughtfully stimulated by it too. The film is visually poetic right from the credits, with images--close-ups of flowers melting away through lenswork or computer tricks or both--that herald the sensuous feel of the whole film.The film's axis is a massacre at a high school by a disturbed young man--hardly an untopical event these days. It follows a couple of female, teen-age best friends up to and well beyond the bloody events of that day. Rachel Evan Wood plays "Diana," one of the two girls--a restless, sexually active, alienated, self-willed and somewhat confused young woman, whose friend Maureen (Eva Amurri) presents a counterweight to those qualities.Uma Thurman plays Wood's character as a grown-up--an art history teacher with a husband, a child, and traumatic memories of the day that changed everything. We'll avoid spoilers, since right up to the end of this film, the viewer has been led to look at the film one way, and it may not be the right way. That said, there's a "Sophie's Choice" element at its crux, though one less gratuitous in its framing and in its consequences than I've always considered that hinge of Styron's book (and of the film made from it) to be. However, against the decisive turning point represented by the massacre, the film examines what seem to be a number of uniquely female preoccupations and dilemmas: For instance, there's the question of sex. Men are generally all impulse, expressing the conatus of Leibnizian philosophy; women are the gatekeepers. Women, adolescent girls deal with the good girl-bad girl issue: They can say no, and are expected by parents, society to do so; but how long can they and keep a man they may want? So they deal with guilt. They deal with the pressure, and then, often the rejection, even by the same source of the pressure--young boys who then taunt their conquests as "sluts." The blood of their period is akin to, can lead to, the blood of an abortion: this is the blood of Christian-viewed sin, not of "the redemptive blood of the lamb." Another item: Men, for the most part, hold power of life and death over other living, "born" people--they send others to war, to their executions. Women hold that power over the unborn. Maybe it's a fair division. But maybe no one would like to have either power, if they could avoid it.Women are taught, socialized to make a relationship, a marriage, a home. If those things fall apart they are told, in myriad ways, to look first to themselves to blame. Even with a philandering husband. Even with a child who's simply programmed to behave, act out, resist, rebel; among other reasons, as part of the eternal cycle of mother-daughter conflict. As Thurman's Diana says, "I thought if I cared for my child, helped my students, loved my husband, everything would be all right." But doing those things, the right thing, doesn't necessarily control outcomes, bring ultimate happiness.As an art teacher, the lessons Diana is teaching focus on Gauguin--like the art references in Philip Roth's early, seminal novel Goodbye Columbus. I'll leave the point of that reference, that inclusion, for the viewer to explore for themselves, as with the Blake poem Diana reads to her daughter to soothe her to sleep. Likewise the ubiquitous imagery of water in the film: in one scene, young Diana, getting wet in the spray from a fountain, wonders where the boundary is between its mist and the air it is dissipating into. Where is the boundary between consciousness and not-being? Between life in its vibrancy and the ebbing away of life? (Echoes of Richard Linklater's "Waking Life.") There are a few false notes, as in the somewhat hokey dialogue about "the heart being the strongest muscle in the body." Some other witty exchanges reminded me of the improbably smart, ready-for-the Dorothy-Parker-book-of-quips utterances by Ellen Page's precocious teen in last year's phenomenon "Juno." But they're infrequent, and dissolve quickly in the potent, larger mix. The title and final plot twist are in fact a hoary cliché--and a clue ... though one most people, I feel, are unlikely to crack. (Another clue is to be found in the soundtrack, in an old Zombies song heard repeatedly, sometimes in different forms, in the film.) At least, I didn't--the whole weight, momentum of the film are so forceful on behalf of a different supposition. A gorgeous, thoughtful, disturbing film, one that--like "Being There," last year's "Perfume," "2001: A Space Odyssey"--you can hardly imagine being anywhere near as effective in a non-visual medium. Which is why we have film these days, and why, in The Midtown Messenger at least, you'll find it analyzed as the serious "literature" it is. (For more film-osophy of this ilk, as well as "Fake News," humor, satire, news and opinion, visit the online version of our print publication, or google it and click on the link for its blog.)
Looking forward to a second viewing
posted on 12 Apr 2009This is a story of a 30 something mother who seemingly leads the ideal life: career as an art teacher, successful husband, a nice home, children...but as always, there are skeletons in her closet. You quickly learn that her home life is less than perfect and she is dealing with a haunting past. Flashing back and forth from her childhood to her present adult life, the film tells that she had tragically lost her closest childhood friend in a horrific school shooting. Thinking this was in the past, she went on with her life, but now the tragedy is manifesting itself and causing her to face the truth and face her past. The story is very well done and maintains a realistic quality. I am truly looking forward to seeing it a second time.
Dull, dull, dull,
posted on 10 Apr 2009A poor movie. I cannot believe how much this tedious, repetitious, derivative, fill-in-the-blanks, you-know-what's-going-to-happen-next mistake of a movie has been so over-praised on this board.Performances are consistently bad, as if everyone knows this movie is a joke and is doing a weak job on purpose. Uma sleepwalks through her role: she obviously lacks interest in her character, and who can blame her? The "professor" husband is a implausible through and through--has he taken any acting lessons in his life? The cutesy kid who likes to hide (guess why???) is insufferable, one of the worst child actors I have ever seen.Dialogue is dull. The teeny-bopper conversation was uninteresting the first time we heard it. But to hear it again ... and again ... and again.... The "adult" conversations are goofy, as if the scriptwriters are bachelors who never had children (or were children themselves) and are only guessing at how grownups talk about children and marriage.The plot is astonishingly predictable from almost the first ten minutes. The political perspective--a heavy-handed criticism of abortion rights--is retrogressive. Why couldn't they have made a stronger point about gun control, for example--an issue that seems to be entirely lost in the film, taking a back seat to the Catholics and abortion. The idea that this production is making money on the tragedies of school shootings is nauseating.I really see nothing to interest anyone in this film. It was not released in theatres in my area, and I can see why after watching it on DVD.
Style over substance, and welcome to flashback hell
posted on 08 Apr 2009Very stylish and artistic film with truly beautiful cinematography and a fine, story-matching musical score. Too bad the overdone flashback-flash forward technique used didn't match up well with the disjointed story or the fine quality technical elements, and as a result the film was very nice to look at artistically, but a failure at what it attempted to tell us, which admittedly is a difficult way to make a film work out the best way in the end, IMO. The chances of success in this type of storytelling are heavily outweighed by the chances of failure, and this one failed me.The Columbine-like story elements were dramatically staged and very effective for what happened later, as they seemed to set the stage for the traumatized but dreamlike later life of one of the students involved in the massacre, a loose and easy but beautiful girl named Dianna, who along with her best friend were the last students to be confronted by the shooter.The story had to be seen all the way to the very end to get it fully, and I won't spoil it for those not seeing it yet, but the answer the adult Dianna gave to the question asked her by a helper as she arrived to attend the 15 year memorial of the school shootings nearly gave away the story's end, as it then became clear what really happened 15 years earlier in this filmmaker's story of mixed fantasy and reality.(The graveyard scene near the end, and what the young Dianna saw on the marker there also gave a clue of what might have happened in the shooting and what was to be revealed later.)I had to ask my wife what Dianna was asked by the helper, as the entire soundtrack was garbled and only about half was intelligible, a real problem in arty and modern "veritas" movies like this one that often seem to try too hard to be "realistic" and thus leaves the listener/viewer with serious dialogue confusion as a result, to me a basic film-making element that must be done right for overall success.With the still very attractive Uma Thurman as the mature Dianna, and the Hollywood-beautiful-blond-type Evan Rachel Wood as the teenage Dianna, it was as much a feast for the male eye as the story was to females. But, due to the disjointed way of telling this confusing story through its tiring flashback-flash forward method, I was thoroughly tired of it by the time it ended.
Something for everyone
posted on 27 Mar 2009This amazing film is not just a "chick flick". I think it holds a little something for movie lovers of all kinds. It's an emotional story, that also offers a appropriate humor and edge of your seat suspense. Without giving away any spoilers, I'll just say that the ending is very well done. I was pleased with this film for many reasons, but the talent really stood out as first rate. The actress playing young Diane delivered an unforgettable performance, and as usual Uma Thurman was flawless. Although this film is not here typical genre, her performance was not lacking, in fact I believed she shined. The lesson you take from this film is to not take life as you know it for granted, things can change in a second.
sixth sense much?
posted on 01 Feb 2009full on copy cat of Elephant and Sixth Sense. too bad because the actors are great. but it drags on and on and when you do catch on you're too bummed to keep watching - but you do because you can't convince yourself that this is a copy-cat film. there is no sense of fullness to the characters or situations - there is randomness - perhaps this is intentional. i really wanted to enjoy this film, but wow, when will academics realize their stories just are not that interesting except to themselves. essentially there is too much selfishness in too many of the characters in these kinds of films for audiences to enjoy. these people are too self involved scripted or unscripted. too bad - because uma is so wasted in this junk.
Great ending...
posted on 14 Jan 2009I was very pleased with this film throughout, even before watching the surprising, extremely good ending. Unfortunately, that's all I want to say, for fear of spoiling it for everyone. But, take my word for it, "WOW". This film was really quite a treat. It has been a while since I have enjoyed a story so much. The entire film was very intense, and wonderfully put together doing a great job balancing the past and present without causing confusion. Being male, I have to also mention that this is not just a movie for women. I had heard word that it was being categorized as a "women's movie" and I have to disagree. Men and women alike can enjoy this one.
Absolutely Perfect!
posted on 04 Jan 2009How did this movie slip by the general public without rave reviews and heavy box office? Some studio missed making a bundle by not producing and distributing this film. Granted, I watched the DVD, having few choices this week from Netflix and from the first chord of James Horner's mesmerizing musical score, I was drawn in unlike any film I've seen this year and I usually see up in the thousands per year. Uma and Evan Rachel have never been better. The extras on the DVD are spoilers so watch the feature first. I was so entranced by each scene that when the final scene appeared, I didn't have a clue as the script was so tightly written. The novel's author was first a poet and her hand at prose is equally as good. I watched it a second time immediately to watch for clues and flaws...there were none. The director, DP, writer, set designer, and the entire cast are ALL Oscar worthy. Maybe the Independent Spirit Awards will heap honors on it next winter. I can see how the film might turn off teen viewers, but to regular adult moviegoers, do NOT miss this movie!
An intensely beautiful picture
posted on 11 Dec 2008I had the privilege of seeing this film at its World Premiere this weekend at the Toronto Film Festival. From the very opening sequence, this picture draws you in with its sheer beauty. The cinematography is terrific and at some points even terrifying (in a breath taking way) but what impressed me most was the dialog. Everything seemed so real, which played up every detail to me and made the picture all the more engrossing. Uma Thurman is top notch in this but i believe that Evan Rachel Wood really makes it because honestly, who else could we expect to play the teen angst better than her? The relationship between Eva Amurri's Maureen and Wood's Diana is so realistic in every situation and much of that credit has to go to Emil Stern's adaptation. There are so many themes that run deep throughout this movie, and the ever pressing scare of school shootings makes this hit home really really hard. This is an amazing film that will touch every single emotion and leave you thinking about it for days. Go see this movie whenever you get the chance. It is an intensely beautiful and moving film and most definitely one of the best I have seen so far this year.
What on earth?
posted on 29 Nov 2008Whoever praises this movie is either already highly invested in it and stand to profit from that or has no clues. The confusing and at times annoying switches between time periods really detracts from my enjoyment of the film. If anything, Uma didn't really act much except for a few crying scenes! Anyways, don't bother if you don't want to waste time watching a rather confusing film that tries to make you work out what's happening and then make you think that the answer is coming towards the end of it, only to abruptly end with nothing answered at all. Quite an anti-climax overall. Nothing could be further from a good film than this garbage that I had just witnessed.
Wow!
posted on 29 Nov 2008"WOW" is a great word for this film. It leaves you almost speechless...I'm having trouble finding words to do it justice. We've all seen many flashback/transition films, but none as well done as this one. The characters are so believable, you feel as if they truly are one person! Evan Rachel Wood did a fantastic job as a young Uma Thurman. I think we will be seeing a lot more of her because of this film. I can't think of one negative comment or criticism. This film was brilliantly done. The story was intriguing, cast was flawless, and you leave feeling the emotion of the film. I said it before and I'll say it again...."WOW"
Moving and well-acted drama mourning the loss of youth, it mesmerizes until the very end.
posted on 13 Nov 2008'The Life Before Her Eyes' (if you ask me they should have just stuck by 'In Bloom') tells the story about Diane, a victim in a high school shooting who suffers from an extreme case of survivor guilt; the audience witnesses the story in flashes cutting from a young Diane (Evan Rachel Wood) to an adult one(Uma Thurman). 'The Life Before Her Eyes' makes for director Perelman's always difficult follow up to his widely acclaimed debut 'House of Sand and Fog', the very tough to swallow (because of it's heavy nature, not because it's unbelievable) drama that gave Connelly a chance to stretch her dramatic muscles again (see: Requiem For A Dream) and for a change placed Kingsley in a movie worthy of his talents. Horner's score received an Oscar nomination, so Perelman wisely didn't change a winning team and took the composer under his wing again for this film. And his hypnotizing score spellbinds us from the opening credits right until the end, a perfect companion for DP Edelman's slow moving camera and flower-colored pallet.The music, the slow motion water and nature scenes, the repetition of pivotal scenes, the way the pace almost dawdles, these elements create an accentuating background against which the story can unfold beautifully in all it's complex sensitivity, making sure of maximum impact with the audience. TLBHE's story involves a deeply tragic event, and the tragedy got under my skin and by the end it completely invaded me, mixed with my blood and will reverberate in my brain for a long time. What TLBHE essentially deals with is the loss of youth, it's a painful reminder of how fragile life really is, that bad things happen to good people sometimes and how powerless we are to random violence. Greater than the loss of anything physical is the loss of moral, the fading of ideals and the corruption of our souls, can we stop it and how do we do it? Dreams are shattered, and the only thing to replace them is a mild comforting emotion called acceptance. These are questions the film doesn't really deal with, but it evoked them, with me anyway. An attentive and committed viewer will not drown in the abundance of repeated scenes, but will swim in the waters of meaning this movie beholds...and will be moved. What holds TLBHE back from being a masterpiece is the lacking script,which doesn't hold enough aces up it's sleeve to justify the ending, luckily the rest of the movie is saved by it's sensitive dialog and fine-tuned multi-layered performances, especially by Evan Rachel Wood. Her 'timeline' is where the movie really shines the brightest, the conversations between her and her best friend are signs of that blissful ease and those wonderful life discoveries that come with youth, yet also point out the agony of unfulfilled deep desires and longing for security and stability. Whereas the interactions between Diane and her mother underline the possible negative aspects of adulthood, how growing up can lead to the destruction of innocence and the freezing of the heart. 'I don't want to grow up to be a bitter woman who's angry all the time for no reason', young Diane remarks. At which her best friend replies: 'With a heart like yours, that's not going to happen'. Yet, some scenes later, adult Diane begins to act very much like the person she wanted to avoid at all costs to become.One of the aspects that amazed me most about this film is how I didn't doubt for one second that Wood and Thurman were the same character. Besides the lack of very much physical resemblance. A very odd sensation, I must say. I doubt we'll be seeing any Oscar nominations here, but critics should at least take note of them. It may not be too long before one of these leading ladies will be up for the highest honor.TLBHE ends up being a more than solid confirmation of Perelman's great dramatic talent, and by the familiarity of the subjects displayed and the convincing acting it is very likely to move viewers, I know it moved me.
Possible Uma's Best Role Yet
posted on 13 Nov 2008The life before her eyes could possibly be Uma Therman's best role to date. As much as I loved her in Kill Bill Volume 1 & 2, I think I liked her more in this movie. Not only was her acting in this film perfect, so was the acting of all the other characters. I hadn't heard of most of the cast so I was a little unsure how it was going to be, but it turned out amazing from beginning to end. If you want to watch a drama that is sure to stick with you this is the movie to watch. Finally a movie that is unique and not the typical cliché story line. I can't stress enough how good of a movie this was. For the first time in a long time I can say if you don't see this movie you are truly missing out.
Weak Attempt to Cash in on School Shooting Curiosity
posted on 06 Oct 2008While Rachel is still a young teen herself, ignorant, and gullible, it amazes me that Uma took a film this bad. The story is like something made up for a religious magazine or booklet handout.In short, had I seen this before Juno, I wouldn't have been so hard on Juno. As bad as Juno is, this is easily one of the worst teen films ever made. It doesn't even offer a soundtrack worth listening to unless you include a brief clip of The Zombies "She's Not There". If only the film wasn't there, my time wouldn't have been wasted.Besides the simplistic religious preaching at the core of the story, the worst part may be the attempt to cash in on the interest and curiosity about school shootings. The film provides absolutely no insight into them. If anything, it might promote a school, theater, camera, or TV shooting.
Awesome concept, but hardly original.
posted on 14 Aug 2009About half-way through the movie, I got a very familiar sense that I knew this story. By the time I was three quarters through, I remembered that 18 years earlier I had seen the identical story portrayed in Jacobs Ladder (1990), starring Tim Robbins. Swap the High-school shoot-out for a Vietnam battle scene, and one could say that Bruce Joel Rubin may want to ask 'writer' Laura Kasischke if her next original concept might be a remake of Stuart Little. I am actually rather careful when I shop the video store these days, as novel stories are getting more rare. As a writer myself, I'm all too aware that as time passes in an increasing population, the likelihood of a truly original idea diminishes. I do concede that the school rampage was fairly well done, but everything else was pretty-much a rip off