Cool News
Massawyrm Says A MIGHTY HEART Actually Lacks It!!
Hola all. Massawyrm here.
Look, I acknowledge that this is based upon a very true, very tragic event. What happened to Daniel Pearl is something I wouldn't wish upon anyone. But it is incredibly tough to review a film that gains the entirety of its power from the truth of the events contained therein, especially when you have to talk about the events they show you and what they mean to an 'audience.'. It is important to note that the criticism I have for this film are just that – criticism of the presentation of the story as it is intended to entertain, move and enlighten. Because as a film, A Mighty Heart neither entertains, moves, or effectively enlightens.
A Mighty Heart's biggest problem is director Michael Winterbottom's choice to direct this using the very same fly on the wall, documentary style that Paul Greengrass used to place us smack dab in the middle of a hijacking in United 93. While that choice worked for Greengrass, it did so because each and every one of us who walked into that theatre carried with us deep seeded fears, anxieties and emotional scars from that event. There isn't an adult among you who doesn't remember where they were when they first heard the news. So let me ask you this: Where were you when you first heard Daniel Pearl was kidnapped?
And there's the problem. I certainly couldn't tell you where I was. When I first heard the news I probably grumbled about the fact that the biggest story of the day is always pre-empted by any news of someone ignoring the almost sacred neutrality of journalists in dangerous situations. I know when I heard I probably didn't think much of it. And I certainly don't harbor any long lasting emotions on the issue aside from that of polite sorrow. A man I never knew put himself in harms way and something horrible happened to him. It's an awful story, but one to which I have no particular attachment.
And sitting down to watch A Mighty Heart you initially get the impression that this film is setting out to change that fact. To introduce you to a wonderful man and his beautiful wife, only to whisk you away into the terrible circumstances that separated them forever; to put you in their story so you can understand. But it doesn't. Instead the documentary style gives it a very sterile, unremarkable feel. You watch as Daniel Pearl makes his way through his day just as if it were any other. Any other that a Jewish journalist would be setting up a private meeting with a well known radical jihadist.
And that's where this film first began to lose me. It was expecting me to get on board with the terrifying abduction of a man who got into a car full of strangers that hate his people on principle. I was supposed to think Oh, how dare they rather than What the hell was he thinking??? Jihadists??? Had this event not been predicated with about ten minutes of Pearl meeting with several people who all told him the same thing Yeah, if you meet him in public, you SHOULD be okay I might not have suffered such an overriding disconnect. He even remarks Everyone keeps telling me that. Guess who didn't have their meeting in public?
From that point on, if you haven't climbed aboard the emotional express, you won't. The bulk of the remainder of the film is incredibly passive. You watch as people sit around tables on cell phones and laptops, sometimes talking, sometimes crying. Then someone will get a call or e-mail. Everyone gets excited. Then they sit around and wait for another one. This goes on for roughly another hour/hour and a half until the inevitable happens.
And that's pretty much it. Occasionally we cut away to the police running down suspects and complaining about how embarrassing this is for Pakistan. But really most of the film is about cell phones and laptops, not about following the events of tracking an abduction or what was happening to Daniel himself. As a result, you become board and uninvolved, just waiting for the ending that anyone that has heard of Daniel's story knows is going to happen.
The film's one saving grace, and what you will no doubt see quoted from every review, is Angelina Jolie's performance. I can easily say without any hesitation that I am far from her biggest fan and yet I found her positively incredible. This is not only her best performance since Girl, Interrupted, it is far and away superior to that role. She gives a career defining performance that will soften the hearts of her harshest critics. Jolie simply melts into the skin of Mrs. Pearl and becomes entirely unrecognizable. If there is any reason at all to see this, it is to see the transformation the she accomplishes here.
That said, it still wasn't enough to make this movie for me. Angelina will no doubt pick up an Oscar nod for this next year, but Winterbottom and the film won't. I'm normally a fan of Winterbottom's work – but this time it falls pretty flat. I can't recommend this one at all except for the most diehard of Jolie fans and for those who might also carry some emotional resonance for the Daniel Perl story. I walked in rather unfeeling about the facts of the event. And I walked out the same way. And that's something of a failure in my book.
Until next time friends, smoke ‘em if ya got ‘em.
Massawyrm
Got something for the Wyrm? Mail it here.
-
+ Expand All
-
word
-
Perhaps?
-
...still doesn't really make me want to see it, though.
-
Go back to shitting out kids, Angelina.
I'm only kidding (as Michael Jackson would say). -
although, if you were Daniel Pearl, i assume it would be best of all to have An Invulnerable Neck. Although i get that that would be a lousy name for a film.
-
..deep seeded. Way to master the vernacular. What's your native tongue?
-
I also let "Left me Board", and missed an "A" in the final Pearl. slip through today. That's what I get for editing in the 6 O' Clock hour. Correction noted. Although I believe you and I share a native language - Southwestern Douche. =P
-
I don't really like the worthy films. Hotel Rwanda and the like. I always get the impression I'm supposed to like them more because of the real-life story than what's being presented in the film. Also, they can be boring, and then I feel all guilty because I should be more into it.I do like Angelina Jolie, though, and not just because she's nice to look at. Good actress when she's not falling back on simply being attractive in films, which is what she does more often than not (Mr & Mr Smith, Tomb Raider, etc.). She was excellent in Girl, Interrupted, which I am trumpeting for the second time today, and also great in Gia.
-
Where some left-wing moonbat toad like ZombieSolutions starts sprouting out his anti-western, anti-capitalist, pro-marxist, pro-jiahd bull shit? Just saying...
-
This review is spot on, Jolie is very good but the film is completely unengaging.
-
Until it turned into a big screen episode of "Without a Trace." The it became same-old same-old with an ending you already know.But yeah, Jolie's undeniably awesome, I too forgot she can actually act.
-
yeah I feel the sme way about "message" movies, but I thought Blood Diamond was EXCELLENT it's about the only recent "message" or 'worthy" movie I've liked recently
-
While I really liked this movie, I can't fault you on your own opinion except for one part of your review that just seems misinformed: the part you said that "lost" you when Daniel Pearl set up the meeting with the Jihadist. NOBODY KNEW PEARL WAS JEWISH. And the meeting was SUPPOSED TO TAKE PLACE IN PUBLIC. If Pearl had known where he was really going to be taken he obviously wouldn't have gone.
-
so now they are making movies about 9/11 without rocking the boat. A mighty heart was reviewed on newsnight review. They all said that the teeming scenes in Pakistan was the movies strength. But that the weakness was when they cut back to america. When Paul greengrass was doing press for united 93. He avoided all questions surrounding the politics of the movie. He would only say that both the victims of united 93 and hijackers were pretty much all in the dark. Yet when Cal Thomas reviewed it on the last were. he laid the blame at the door of the terrorists. Same thing happened to World Trade centre, which Stone didnt write, he only directed. That movie didnt rock the boat in way. Conservatives loved it. i didnt see it. but i gather the left thought that he had lost his marbles. A mighty heart, sounds like another conservative crowd pleaser to me.
-
But I do worry that he is becoming too much of a hollywood. player. Bloody sunday is his masterpiece. If you havent seen that I suggest you all should. Greengrasses Iraq movie will be another dont rock the boat movie.
-
Is that Marianne Pearl is the least interesting part about it. Why not make a movie focusing on Daniel Pearl? It's like that Steven Biko movie with Kevin Kline as the star or Last King of Scotland with Idi Amin in a supporting role.
-
To a dull, Hollywood biopic. Are there any directors left who refuse to go Hollywood and just stick with what they're good at? Seriously, name one.
-
Well, actually, the meeting was to take place at the Restaurant he was waiting at. When they changed the meet, it was his decision to get in the car and go. And when asked about his religion, it was done in such a way that it did not require him to admit he was Jewish. They never asked him to deny he was Jewish - he just kind of proudly announced it in a situation in which the honest answer "You know, I'm not really that religious" would have sufficed. Whether that is what really happened or not is in question - but in the context of the film, that moment left me wondering "Dude, what the hell are you thinking?"
-
What's happened?
-
I thought the part with Daniel and Mariane interviewing that guy, in which Daniel told him he was Jewish, was just a flashback to display that Daniel was proud of his heritage. At the time of his kidnapping, nobody seemed to know (judging from the scene in which Jolie takes Irrfan Khan in the back room and tells him). I could be wrong though; frankly a lot of plot details are hard to catch, at least for me. As for Daniel getting back in the car, I assumed he thought he was going to another public place, but I figured my confusion was supposed to mirror his anyway, so it didn't bother me, especially when it was revealed that they had been planning the kidnapping for a long time. Since I enjoyed the movie, I'd like to see it again so I could catch more of the specifics.
-
I thought the movie was going to be terrible based on the trailers. Boring and insipid, just like you said. It turned out to be a pretty enthralling thriller, IMHO, and an extremely interesting one. The title is terrible.
-
So I'll turn into a plank of wood...?
-
I called myself out on that typo a few hours ago. You'll find it a a dozen or so talkbacks up.
-
Sorry, that shit was low.
-
Jun 20, 2007 12:46:51 PM CDT
Also, one of these days I'll be able to watch United 93
by mr.underwater
I actually own the DVD, but every time I attempt to push play, I can't go through with it.
-
For Jolie alone, she's that good
-
It seems as of late that some of the best acting is being done in some of the lesser films. All these "okay" films are getting all the great acting, while the good films could have been great if they had some of that great acting. Can we please find a way to get these great performances in great movies, because I'm tired of not getting the best of both worlds.
-
Massa I've read everyone on this site for the last six years or so and you come across as a sensible, logical, pragmatic guy as far as I can tell. Plus I like that your reviews don't include Lake Travis flashback references and/or obscene stories about what your body's organs are able to do during extreme movie-watching experiences.With that said I'm REALLY surprised you made a comment about Danny Pearl's journalistic neutrality especially considering I'd expect you of all people on the site would recognize that NO ONE is considered neutral, regardless of gender, age, nationality, ethnicity, religion or sexual-preference when it comes to the Wahabbi interpretation of Islam. For instance, Danny P had his head severed off because he was a J-E-W and an A-M-E-R-I-C-A-N. Thus he committed two MAJOR offenses against God, the Prophet and Islam. Therefore Danny had to die. Period. To me, there's no mighty heart story there. There's no negotiating there. There's no dialogue to be had. And, there's no clemency for a journalist, especially when he/she is perceived to be an Israeli/Zionist spy.Now I'm sure this will ignite ALOT of responses provided anyone is even reading this talkback but what I've listed above were Pearl's offenses and crimes against Islam and that's why he HAD to die, and this comes directly from Zarqawi himself, so don't flame me instead send a note to him in hell.In sum Massa please keep the reasons he died in mind when thinking about this movie or any story about someone who is taken captive, regardless of their specific situation. All are apostates you understand, lest they be Wahabbis, and all are eligible and are required to die. EVEN YOU!
-
One correction to your disconnect Wyrm. Yes, he is warned about meeting Gilani in public. But he NEVER meets Gilani. The whole thing was a set-up. Remember?
-
I was going to challenge EmeraldBoy on his wacko goofball point of view, but I realized he was either an idiot or just trying to bait people. Either way, I decided not to bite.
-
He'd tell him to (gunshot)in' meet him in public or (gunshot) off!
-
Well, Pearl knew he was Jewish, and that the jihadists he was meeting would kill a Jew as soon as look at him. He therefore knew there would be risks. Oh, also, why was he interviewing them in the first place? "Balance" in reporting? "Yes, tell me, why *are* you so against freedom and democracy? Were you spurned as a child?"
-
Ireland. Are in the the name of the father(sheridan know admits that he did go overboard with triumphalism in at least two scenes). The crying game. There is another movie called Elephant starring Kenneth Branagh. Its a silent movie. Shot in colour and very powerful it is to. The Rest are british backed propoganda movies. The elephant being secteranism. I am glad that i didnt growup in Northern Ireland in the 1980's. what a fucking horrible place.
-
I always thought you were great for picking apart the liberalist slant in most movies. I consider myself liberal, but I hate hollywood's riduclous opionated liberalism in films like "Crash" et all. That's why I thought you'd be able to see this movie for dynamic and thoughtful film it really is. You really wanted the emotional overwrought weepie? really??!?!?! Wow, and you're whole reasoning for how Pearl lost you? that's kind of ridiculous and slightly offensive. This movie is essentially a docu-drama and you say it loses you because of one of his journalistic choices? wow. for a good review, everyone read this: http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=reviews&id=10785
-
forgive the spelling errors, above.
-
What are you even trying to say? No, honestly, I read your post twice and I don't get what your point was. What did Massa say that you were objecting to?
As for Pearl, according to the facts presented in the movie he didn't HAVE to die because there certainly seemed to be a lot of negotiations behind the scenes, demands, considerations, etc. And since when did Muhammed and the Quran list "being American" as an offense? -
No desire to see this one
-
I don't want to see this though. I watch too much news as it is.
-
they nearly blew up margaret thathcher's govt. on the other side The shankill butchers, roamed the streets of belfast looking for catholics to kill and cut up. Though the Ira never cut people's heads off, the net was two decades away. the were ruthless none the less. The story Jean McConville is the one that sticks in peoples minds. Here was a wholly innocent person, branded as an informant, Tortured for two days where she was made to sign a bogus confession that she was a spy, they then took her to an unmarked grave, which they made her dig and then they shot her in the back of the head. They then spread stories about how she was a tout for which her children were bullied on the playground. The Ira destroyed that family and for thirty years refused to say where she was buried. Just like al-qaeda, when they killed Ken bigley and Margaret Hussein.
-
Wow, Massawyrm's reviews absolutely blow.
-
Come on dude, if you're gonna keep trolling my reviews, at least show you've got something to back it up. You've said all the blaise bullshit except "A four year old could write better than the wyrm -teehee". Come on dude, if you're gonna be an ass, at least be an entertaining one. Otherwise, why even waste our time?
-
I wasn't gonna call 'em out or anything though. I know how hard it is to smoke, type, and juggle Dr. Pepper all at the same time.
-
propaganda-spewing right winger is a propaganda-spewing left winger. Emeraldboy, thanks for the thread--I needed the sleep.
-
I'm not a reviewer for this site. You are. I'm a talkbacker. I'm not supposed to be entertaining. You however are a reviewer and you rarely do that. You don't review movies. You don't write anything that comes close to a review. So the burden of proof is on you to prove that you can actually write a decent review.
-
...is a douche. But I'm not a reviewer for Err, so I don't have to back that up. And yes, I am a plant.
-
Somewhat like Jim Carrey in a drama, Jolie's sex appeal is wasted here. There apparently is more to her than that, just nobody wants to see it. Plus it was a story w/o an audience about a not so bright guy who tried to get ahead by cozying up to vermin. From what I hear HEART was too politically correct as well, not painting the Jihadists as the murdering monsters they are. But the one thing no one mentioned is the major faux pas Jolie made handling the premiere. First she demanded Fox News NOT be allowed to cover it. They had given her and the film glowing reviews. Then she demanded that the other media sign a legal contract that they would not ask questions about her personal life and the interviews/footage would be used ONLY to promote the movie. That should they not agree, she would cite damages and sue the offender. Almost no one agreed. Later she said lamely it had all been a mistake by her publicist. Yeah right. Now lie on top of it. Revealing her pissant arrogance and stone deaf stupidity handling the media, the damage was done. If she sought to only focus attention on the movie, she did the opposite. And to top it off, this was a film about freedom of the press to report what they want, something she attempted to deny to those covering it. You cannot make up this kind of Liberal hypocrisy and it undercut the whole purpose of the flick. It will only do about half the business expected. Stupid is, as stupid does.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts