There was a screening of Shoot 'Em Up during the San Diego ComicCom 07 at the GasLamp Theater. My cousins and I almost didn't get to see it because the nim-witted box office staff decided ticket stubs would be needed to get into the theater even though we had Shoot 'Em Up passes directly from New Line Cinema reps. Because ticket stub holder got in first, we ended up sitting in the top seats of the theater, which turned out to be a blessing. Clive Owen actually attending the screening and sat right behind my cousin. Hehe!! As for the movie, it's one of the best action flicks of the summer. The director wanted to make a John Woo style film and he succeeded with this goal. The gun battles are terrific. Clive Owen plays Mr. Smith. A man in the right place at the wrong time. In the opening scene he watches as a killer chases a pregnant woman into an alley with a gun. Not one to stand and let a woman get killed, he takes action to protect the woman and her baby. What follows is a series of misfortunes and narrow escapes as pieces of the plot are put together. Why was this man trying to kill this woman? What does the baby have to do with this crazed hit-man (play by Paul Giamatti) who's after him? Will Mr. Smith's call girl squeeze DQ (played by Monica Bellucci) help him? All these questions are answered in the movie. Just when you're about to take a breather from the action, it revs up again and takes off. Even though the plot is a little thin, it's unique as well. I'm not going to give any of it away either. The only real downside is the action isn't realistic in some of the scenes. Things happen to perfectly for our hero, whereas in real life he most likely wouldn't have made it to the end of the movie. You know what I'm talking about? The movie is still very fun to view and weighing in at only 90mins, it won't take up your whole afternoon. This is a must see for fans of John Woo and action films. I'm going to see it again with the wife when it gets released in Sept. I rate it 8/10.


Where do I begin with this film? To say that this has got to be one of the worst films I have ever seen would be too simplistic and it would be letting this film off lightly. Yes, it is one of the worst films I have ever seen, however how bad it is exactly cannot be measured by a mere passing remark.

I am a huge fan of Paul Giamatti & Clive Owen, their combined body of work is impressive to say the least, with works such as Sideways, The Illusionist and American Splendour (Giamatti) with Croupier, I'll Sleep When I'm Dead and Children of Men (Owen) to their name, this is a pedigree of some standard and to bring them together on a project has gave this film some much needed gravitas that has allowed it to have a cinema release, because believe me if this film didn't have these actors in it, it would have never seen the light of day.

I am not adverse to films of a mindless nature, believe me I have sat through films such as Deep Blue Sea and Transformers and been thoroughly entertained, they are what they are, however when you have a mindless action film that have bad set pieces terrible dialogue, even worse scripting and woeful special effects all you are left with is Shoot 'em Up.

From babies being delivered in the middle of gunfights, people having sex in the middle of gunfights, people parachuting in the middle of gunfights, gunfights in the middle of gunfights, this film is loud, clichéd, stupid and just basically a mess.

The dialogue sounds like it has been written by a 1st year film student who has been watching Lock, Stock and two Smoking Barrels on a continuous loop. The action sequences are terribly handled, feeling unrealistic, stilted and just plain rubbish. The special effects make this already bad film just feel even worse, I am aware what this film is trying to do with its tongue in cheek take on the action flick, however not to throw any money into the budget of this film (£23,000,000) has meant it doesn't even have its special effects to rely on, they make it look cheap and quite unremarkable.

Ultimately what is unfortunate about this film is that it has been able to attract two of Hollywood's brightest talents and shoe-horn them into one of the biggest piles of sh*t I have ever seen. I am sure that their careers will not suffer too much, however I feel that the paying audience have suffered enough. You watch this film at your own peril...don't say I didn't warn you.


I sat in the darkened theatre pondering this question: if the 7 teenagers in front of me were having such a great time, why wasn't I? Was I missing something here? Did I not get it? I came to the conclusion as the credits rolled, that I got it alright. It just didn't work. I glance at the kids in the rising light looking like they just got off a roller-coaster, and I understand. I'm not a teenager.

This is more of a kid's movie than any of the so-called kid's movies I saw this year. Stardust was an adult oriented fantasy. Ratatouille had distinctly adult oriented humour that no doubt went over most kid's heads. Yet a film that is supposed to be adult, Die Hard 4.0, was aimed directly at the kids. And now this, the kind of movie I would have lapped up at 15 or so. It has everything I would have wanted back then: Gunfire, swearing, boobies, bad puns, lots of blood, increasingly gory deaths. Oh, and er, lactating hookers. This is a film that is decadent and racy for the sake of it, possibly to have it's pre-pubescent audience snigger at the use of a rude word. There are those who would frivolously use the word 'satire' to describe this film. Shoot 'Em Up does not even come close to being that deep. In the end, it just becomes a pale imitation of the folly it pokes fun at.

The plot is non-existent. I expected this much, only I half expected for there to be at least a thread to hold it all together. I was wrong. Instead, it has different variations on that cinematic darling, the gunfight. We have gunfight while eating carrot, death by carrot, firing a gun with a carrot, gunfight during sex, gunfight while birthing, gunfight while parachuting and gunfight with no workable fingers with which to fire (that's where the carrot comes in again). Imagine if you will, an E! Entertainment special, Top 1001 movie gunfights and you have Shoot 'Em Up. It's trying to be desperately clever and winds up being desperately generic. Some are even pretty well constructed, but others, the majority, instantly forgettable.

There's no character development to speak of, which again, I expected, but these people are literally made of cardboard. How can an audience be expected to be thrilled by a gunfight if they don't care about anyone in it? Furthermore, the script is so full of cringe-worthy lines, it's hard to see why writer Michael Davis may have thought he was being clever when writing them. Clive Owen's mythical charisma is lost on me. I see him at his best in small films such as Croupier or Children of Men in which he actually plays a character, but so far his blockbuster roles have been disappointing. His King Arthur was about as stale as they come and his deadpanning in this role feels forced and unenthusiastic. Paul Giamatti looks like he's having fun chewing the scenery, but chew the scenery is all he does and try as he might to be menacing, he falls short of creating any kind of tension.

Director Michael Davis brought us some teen comedies early in the decade such as 100 Girls and Girl Fever, neither of which impressed me due to their complete immaturity and their utter tastelessness, compared even to the likes of Tomcats. Shoot 'Em Up has done nothing to change my mind about his work. Thanks to Girl Fever, I'll never be able to think about Clint Howard the same way again.

So, to sum up, a gormless mess of action sequences, starring the 'almost James Bond' with less plot than a Michael Bay extravaganza and a large abundance of carrots. Movies need a certain amount of substance to survive. This had none. A waste of time and money.


Magnificent, in a word, not for the dude who is going to sit in the corner and say 'oh look how far fetched that is, look at all that CGI, this is so unrealistic', that is the brilliance of this film it is well and truly rip the crap out of the films which try to hide their CGI scenes with the good old chin wag, this film goes all out action, forget a good old nip to the toilets or a steady stroll to the popcorn stall unless you are still at a dated cinema which has intervals which always spoil the drift of the film because you are sure to miss a key action scene which all the guys you went to the movies with wouldn't stop talking about on the trip home. Key roles from Clive Owen and Paul Giamatti were very much so treasured by the film, Owen who finds himself chucked into a very forceful memorable scene with him taking on a gang of street goons after the life of a pregnant woman, and Giamatti playing a very imposing laughable 'Pussy with a gun' see's the film make great use of CGI, great acting, comedy, action and a odd bit of story to make a sight for sore eyes. One which will give forth coming movies a new style of script, this could be the start of something new, a new genre of filming pleasure has brought its first cards to the table. Like crank meets matrix on steroids, one for Mr Woo, an ecstasy of adrenaline.


It's official. This is the worst movie I've seen this year. I find this rather unfortunate because I had been anticipating Shoot 'Em Up for quite some time and had heard many good things about it.

The action was so redundant I was bored out of my mind. The dialogue was god awful and corny. It also failed as a comedy because I think there was only one (maybe two) parts where I laughed.

I wasn't expecting a ton of plot or characterization going in but I was expecting an entertaining movie which this failed terribly at being. By all rights it feels like it was written by a high school student.

So many plot holes are present and the director expects the audience to have way too many suspensions of disbelief. I understand something being over the top but when a filmmaker chooses to completely disregard reality, common sense, and psychics it's not only lazy but insulting.

I was expecting something clever but instead got something dumb and trite. Rather than being a parody of the action genre it merely managed to sink lower than the worst case scenarios of bad movie making and become a prime example of a genre at its absolute worst. I'm honestly amazed at the amount of positive feedback this movie is receiving.


Basically "Shoot'Em Up" is an 80's film using today's modern technology. Replace Arnie or Bruce Willis with Clive Owen and baby in tow and you have this film. Owen's carrot fixation is even put to good use pulling triggers and stabbing the villains in the eyeball or through the mouth and out the back of their necks. See how Owen kills special ops assassins while having sex with "hooker with a heart of gold" Monica Belluci(..she even climaxes as he blows one of these heavily equipped villains through a window). There are a great many stunts where Owen is allowed to create on his feet using his artistry with guns. There's a neon sign he uses to tell arch-nemesis Paul Giammati F-U. Just watch how Owen uses his gun to keep his baby protected on a merry-go-round. Or, when he's in a weapons factory, with Owen elaborately creating a method using strings to develop a labyrinthine maze where baddies carrying machine guns fall prey to gun fire when they turn corners(..even if this is the most ludicrous action sequence ever designed, it's a dream come true for action fans). And, the greatest trick of all..pulling off an anti-gun message in such an insanely violent action film! The way the film finds escapes for Owen is a thing of cinematic genius..no matter how many times we roll our eyes at such absolute nonsense.

The plot,if it truly matters, is about a man minding his own business who can not sit on his street bench and watch a pregnant woman get assassinated. This decision will cause a ton of complications as he assists the lady into giving birth. His *name* is Smith, and the head-honcho who wants the lady and her child dead is Hertz(Giammatti). When a bullet through the forehead leaves this woman dead, Smith will have to find shelter for the infant while dodging constant gun-fire. Thanks to his uncanny use with an assassin's gun(..there was a reason why he didn't have a gun on his person even though he is a skilled marksman), Smith evades his pursuers sending a great many villains to early graves(..or, as chief businessman Hammerson, played by a scarily skinny Stephen McHattie, would say, a "dirt nap"). Hoping for a hooker's(Bellucci) help, whose specialty is feeding her breast-milk to wealthy clientèle with that kinky fetish, he will hope to provide the infant with a temporary home(..in a brothel!). But, Hertz targets her so this hooker will join up with Smith and the baby on their own forming one very unique union. With Hertz undaunted despite heavy losses when several operations to kill Smith fail miserably, he will keep coming until our hero can discover why these murderers want such a precious child dead. Soon the story yields some wacky results like a bone-marrow transplant for an ill senator who wishes to pursue the presidency(..and has a strict policy against guns which would threaten Hammerson's business)as the child is the key to his health and recovery, and an airplane meeting between Smith and who he thought were his allies(..this soon produces a parachute exit and shoot-out in the sky for the ages). And, to top it all off, watch how Smith, with broken fingers, uses a scalpel to evade certain doom. It's all tongue-in-cheek and unpretentious fare, gory escapist fodder for fanboys who love their constant shoot 'em ups with bullet-ridden bodies & colorful villains and dialogue. Outrageous, tricky ways a gun can kill people are on full display. And, this flick rarely takes a breath. Not a critical darling AT ALL, even hated by many, but I dug the hell out of it. Oh, and the use of a tank(..and how Owen provides a way for Bellucci and babe to enter in)for the use of protection so that the baby can remain safe, is just priceless.


Wow This film is so cool. Somehow it kinda reminded my of the film "Leon" a.k.a the professional. Clive Owen is such a great actor and he beautifies the film in the way he eats his carrots and also with all the tricks and stunts. The film also has a very good sense of humour and it made me laughed. The film is full on throttle action packed all the way and I find it very entertaining to watch. This film is how action films should be made and I would recommend to anyone interested in action films. The film basically is about guns and how cool they can be used if it is used by someone who is not a pussy XD. What makes a good film is not how serious it is but how entertaining it is and this one is.


Shoot 'em up is quite possibly the best action movie I have seen so far mix in Broads, Bullets, and a Hardcore selection of rock music like Ace of Spades by Motorhead, If You Want Blood by ACDC and Zen by Strapping Young Lad and you have a movie you can put on even when your not really paying attention, just non stop action all the way through such as your typical "Total Recall" or "Crank" films. If you like rock music, if your sick of the dreary love scenes and dialogue in most films this is the one for you, so lock up your daughters, shoot your sons and check out the best action film of the year. Probably the best watch I have had at the cinema for 2 years 2006-2008


Ticket? Check. Popcorn? Check. Soda? Check. Brain at home? Check.

Shoot Em' Up may look like an insane movie full of action and lack of remorse towards the squeamishthat's pretty much because it is a movie full of action and lack of remorse towards the squeamish. This gritty fast-paced gun show from the get go starts firing action on all cylinders, and will not give you a moment to hesitate until the credits start rolling. Resembling more like Desperado rather than a Frank Miller graphic novel (marketing was gearing in that direction), Shoot em' Up is one of the most insane flicks in recent years. It would have been the craziest movie of the year if it had not been for the fact that Tarantino and Rodriguez joined their unique talents to craft their underrated masterpiece Grindhouse. You are watching this movie for action and no other reason; Shoot em' Up delivers exactly that.

The movie starts off with an obviously disgruntled man sitting by himself in a tough part of town. A pregnant woman is running for her life from a hit-man who has only one intention and it is not to get her number. Five minutes and a crazy gun battle later, this lonely man (Mr. Smith, played by Clive Owen) is protecting a baby that is the target of a group of ruthless assassins headed by the deranged and merciless Hertz (Paul Giamatti). While plot is never a heavy issue with mindless action movies, this one throws a bit of cruel irony by throwing in a bit of gun control and political commentary. To add to that it's a bit of a satire. So, in other words, Shoot em' Up is a satirical mindless comic book-like action movie with a heavy dosage of social commentary. It's a real doozy just thinking about it.

While the trend of delivering over-the-top substance with every passing minute is reaching its stride in adult action movies nowadays, they don't quite reach what Shoot em' Up managed to reach. The difference is, the cast behind the film are totally aware of how ridiculously unbelievable Shoot em' Up is. We have a child born because of a bullet, we have a gun battle midair, and then they even managed to make carrots the most dangerous vegetable in the history of modern film-making. To top it all off, a handgun was used----a hand by a character became a gun. Few movies used more bullets than this nail biter. However, it's not as mind-numbingly violent as recent over-the-top movies like Grindhouse, Kill Bill, Sin City, etc.

Clive Owen has this bitterly heroic persona that resembles a bit like his character in Sin City. While he may be the most dangerous man around, he's not exactly the easiest person to talk to. His dialogue is limited to grudges and clever (but sometimes painful) one-liners. Either way, there's some sort of unique charisma that surrounds him, and it gets the attention of the leading lady in the film (the lovely Donna played by Monica Bellucci) The best performance by far is that of Paul Giamatti, who should definitely take more villain roles. He plays Hertz with plenty of glee and energy, and creeps you out and angers you just as much as the typical Hollywood villain.

It is all about the action, and the writer/director Michael Davis is full aware of this. His resume so far isn't exactly a glorious one, but he should be getting some attention with this movie. Davis does an excellent job keeping the tension and suspense high, while keeping the action not too close to the viewer, but not too far away either. He handles the special and visual effects very well, as the only sequence that requires a lot of effects is directed and run-through so quickly you don't have time to criticize and laugh at the effects (especially after seeing Transformers and At World's End). The commentary might be a turn-off to some, but it's a quirky twist to the genre that usually frays from such blasphemous content.

Bottom Line: Shut off your brain before entering this movie, and you will have one hell of a time. The main problem of Shoot em' Up is that it had to follow after similar yet amazing powerhouse action flicks like Kill Bill, Sin City, and Grindhouse. On the other hand, removing all comparisons, this movie is worth the money, as long as you are full aware that this movie is not going to shoot for an Academy Award (pun intended). Decent performances, decent plot is all overshadowed by the hyper-frenzied amount of action, guns, and gritty sinister moments that you just don't see enough of in movies nowadays to preserve the profit-earning PG-13 rating. Holding no punches, Shoot em' Up is an endless shower of bullets that cascades all over the screen, usually followed by body parts, blood, and smiles across the faces of the audience. You know this film is going to be crazy yet delicious when you see a steamy sex scene and a violent shoot out at the exact same time.


Shoot 'em up starts out insane, and never lets up. The movie is straight up action, much like the Transporter 2 was made, just EVEN MORE ridiculous. The stunts and guns were just awesome, as was the acting by Clive and Paul. They were both funny and intense at the same time. While at the times the stunts are too unbelievable, they still add to the fun and will keep you saying "No way!", "Wow", and "What the hell?!" throughout.

Overall it is definitely worth a look if you are looking for something to do and love brainless action films.

---6.5/10


Shoot em Up is the type of film that under normal circumstances, I wouldn't give the time of day. Its a brainless, action saturated spectacle, filled with wall to wall shootings and over the top action sequences not often seen outside of a Quentin Tarantino picture.

But the fact it stars Clive Owen and Paul Giamatti, two of the world's most underrated actors was enough to convince me to check out the film when it was released to DVD. And thanks to the star power of these two, and the imaginative, impressively mounted direction from Michael Davis, Shoot em Up emerges as quite a delight.

It moves like an Olympic runner on acid, it has a surprising sense of humour, and although it never once takes itself seriously, the film achieves a remarkable consistency and dignity thanks to the sheer enthusiasm of everybody present. Shoot em Up is the type of film that was as much fun for the filmmakers as it is for an audience.

Ever since Clive Owen ascended to the A-list of Hollywood's leading men (something that took far too long in my opinion), he has often been pipped as the next actor to inherit the ongoing role of James Bond. Now of course with Daniel Craig sure to fill those shoes for a fair old bit, it doesn't seem very likely now that Owen will ever assume the role he was born to play. But with Shoot em Up, we get a bit of an idea of what he might have been like in the role.

Shoot em Up does seem a concerted effort to be a deliberate spoof on James Bond. Larger than life villains. Beautiful women. Over the top stunts. And at the centre of it all...a rugged Clive Owen.

The opening scene sets the jokey tone perfectly. The film opens with a closeup of Clive Owen's face. Hard. Tough. Someone you don't mess with. And then without skipping a beat, he begins munching on a carrot. The camera pulls back to reveal Clive sitting on a bench, waiting for the next bus. Sipping coffee...that he stirs with his carrot!

Its very funny. I found myself laughing at the casual absurdity of it all. But before long, the action kicks into overdrive when a pregnant woman walking by is being pursued by a hit-man. Clive, known only as Mr Smith, decides to get involved.

What follows is a blood-soaked, five minute action sequence that involves Smith delivering her baby while in the middle of a bloody shootout. It almost seems a direct parody of the previous year's Children of Men, when Clive Owen had to deliver a baby under similar circumstances. He even shoots off the umbilical cord!

And that's just the beginning. What follows is a steady escalation of shootouts, burnouts and grossouts as Smith, and a hooker along for the ride must protect this baby from the dastardly Hertz (Giamatti).

I'm not exactly sure why I have such affection for Shoot em Up. Maybe its because I'm such a huge fan of Clive Owen. The sheer peppy energy the production crew put into it. Or maybe its the way it blatantly disregards the rules of the game and dares you to laugh along with the action. Its gleefully irreverent, and all the better for it!

Because the film clocks in at a neat 85 minutes, you don't get worn down by the kinesis of the action. It just glides by from one revved up action scene to the next. But it never takes its tongue out of its cheek.

There's always tiny amusements to be found throughout. I like the different uses Smith puts his carrots to. They even become deadly weapons in his hands! Smith's the action man version of Bugs Bunny.

But if Clive Owen is Bugs, then Paul Giamatti is Elmer Fudd. Hertz is not exactly a stretch for an actor of Giamatti's talents, but he doesn't coast by. In fact he looks like he's having more fun than Owen. He chews on the scenery with glorious reckless abandon. He gets plenty of pithy one-liners, and never shies away from delivering them, no matter how hammy they might sound:

"Is he really this good or do we just really suck?"

Clive Owen has always been one of my favourite actors and while Mr Smith doesn't match up to some of his best performances, Children of Men's Theo, Chancer's Stephen Crane, etc, he still launches into the role with his trademark professionalism.

Smith may be a hard man but he's got a fine line in droll observations. Like how irked he gets when people don't indicate before changing lanes on the highway. And he's not above ramming into them with his car to prove his point! I also loved the scene when he chastises a mother for smacking her kid. Literally!

The action scenes don't disappoint either. OK I never believed what I was seeing. But I really enjoyed the imagination (and sheer audacity) of the filmmakers. And if you've ever wanted to see a gunfight while in midair, you can in Shoot em Up!

While watching the film, its probably not a good idea to think about such trivial things as plot! There's something about bone marrow transplants, corrupt senators and gun control lobbying. OK the plot's as thick as five short planks. But when a film is this much fun, who cares how brainless it is!

Shoot em Up is the perfect film for a Friday night in. My advice would be to watch it with some friends, have a few beers and get really sloshed while you're at it. You'll have a hell of a great time!

Don't miss the end credits either. Its the perfect lampoon of a Bond film intro scene. Only without the annoying theme song!


This was a perfect, awesome action movie that I thoroughly enjoyed, right up to the ham-handed political message that the director felt compelled to put in. I don't care how you feel about gun control (I'm against it, so I guess it made it worse) but the way it was put in it didn't even fit, and was, in my opinion, completely unnecessary. I enjoyed the rest of the movie after it, but that part kind of killed the buzz for me. Why do directors feel they need to make the audience think, or that they have to get some kind of message across? Especially when you're putting a message about gun control in a movie like this. Other than that, one of the best action movies I've seen in a long while.


Such a witty movie, lot's of 'moments'. Clive Owen, a ronin sort of being, has a baby - actually the delivery scene is a hoot - and he sets out to feed it and protect it. This is much better humor, drama and better visuals than 800 and yet in the same comic book-style genre. But live.

It's exciting and very fast-paced. But mainly tongue in cheek. Great editing and direction.The editing and film effects can throw you off at the start but hang in there - it's worth it. Once you get into the idiom you're hooked.

If you don't laugh you're dead.

See it.


What do you get when the first 5 minutes of a film has a guy kill somebody with a carrot, and proceed to deliver a baby in the middle of a shoot out while constantly dishing out one liners that are nothing short of snappy-as-hell? You get 'Shoot "Em Up", a movie with a plot that doesn't make much sense and characters who couldn't carry out a conversation to save their life but can somehow always come up with Tarantinoesque one liners at any given moment. As I said, the plot doesn't make much sense, but it basically follows Clive Owen trying to save the baby he rescues after its mother dies giving birth in the middle of a shoot out, while protecting it from the evil Paul Giamatti and his henchmen. What "Shoot 'Em Up" does is take every cliché from every action movie of the past thirty years and make it something totally original, off the wall and impossible to dislike (unless, of course, the violence is too much for you). And it is incredible violent, but on a completely comic book level, and it is actually quite well crafted. The director does seem to know what he's doing, as he takes scenes that have been used in many action movies in the past, and brings them to the next level. Take one scene for example, when Clive Owen's Mr. Smith is having sex with the beautiful Monica Belluci, and right in the middle of it, the bad guys come in. A normal action scene would have him proceed to throw her down, pull out his gun, kill all the bad guys, and get dressed. Here, he pulls out his gun and kills all the bad guys, while still having sex with Belluci. So you see, things are done differently here, and we even have a few questions answered. At another point, One of the main bad guys is talking to Mr. Smith and says, "You know, we weren't really trying to kill you, we just wanted to scare you into surrendering." And Mr. Smith responds, "That explains why your aim is so bad." Now it all makes sense.


I've been looking forward to this film for about 4 months after I saw the description. Though Clive Owen isn't one of my favorite actors, I was so blown away by Children of Men and his very good performance that I had to see his own little action movie. As you've probably read from other post, this is just an action movie and really nothing else. But that is OK because it was very fun and entertaining.

In no more than 3 minutes, you see the first gun shot and quickly the movie turns into a violent gun fight. The coolest part about the beginning scene was Nirvana's Breed started playing. Not often do you see a guy deliver a baby while shooting people at the same time. Then you see Mr. Smith (Owen) run with the baby tucked between his arms like a football! It's hilarious! The plot is just plain stupid but who cares. If you love your action movies, this is the most action you'll see crammed in 80+ minutes in a long time. A lot of people argue that Owen should of been the next Bond (Craig was just too good). This movie is almost like the Bond that Owen never was able do. This movie was like this years Crank. You can't take it seriously but just enjoy the ride.


Given that the first thematic film made was a western ("The Great Train Robbery"), it's startling how many NEW gun-play ideas this film contains.

Less in-your-face nihilism than "Sin City" but just as dark, this film has style and a sense of humor without ever staring at you and winking or preening about just how clever it is. It just keeps going - as one bit of dialog suggests, like the Energizer Bunny.

Owen does his usual suave-with-grease-on-his-face action, and Giamatti is wonderful - after he hits 10, he goes on to 11, 12 and 13, threatening to burst several blood vessels at any moment.

See it on the big screen, while you can.

Author is not a studio plant, a potted plant nor a steel plant.


In a non-specific city somewhere in the U.S.(New York? Chicago?),a sullen,carrot-eating loner named Smith(Clive Owen,clearly relishing his chance to be as unkempt and gnarled as possible,among other things in the movie)witnesses a pregnant woman being chased by a violent man for reasons unrevealed. Against his better judgment,he jumps into the fray and becomes embroiled in what ultimately turns into a war of wits(and guns,of course)with a frothy,flop-sweating--but scarily intuitive and intelligent--crime boss named Hertz(Paul Giamatti,spitting and hissing his lines with dangerous intensity). Along for the ride are the baby Smith delivered and the gorgeous,Italian prostitute(Monica Bellucci,smokingly hot)who is something close to a girlfriend and the only person he can trust.

While the plot seems forced,and the tempo and pacing of the film knows only one speed(well,okay,maybe two),the film is so rife with eye-catching and dazzling stunts,acrobatics and gun-play,and tied together with dialog that seems to be lifted and dried off from old James Bond movies(perhaps a nod to Owen's flirtation with becoming the next 007)that it is perversely enjoyable for its own excesses. Director and writer Michael Davis keeps it lean and very mean as he uses eyes for dimension to let the viewer in on the ping-ponging action,not using much more dialog than necessary and keeping a sly running joke having to do with the sort of happily violent relationship between Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd. The expression "This'll put hair/fuzz on your peaches"comes to mind when I think of this film,and it will appeal to a basically select(read:guys,mostly)audience,but that audience should be pleased with a movie like Shoot'em up. You'll get more shots than just ammo with this 90 minute-plus ride.


Clive Owens, an actor I like a lot, reprises a look and dress that seems a shotgun/Uzi marriage of Sin City by way of Children of Men. Three day beard, black leather, and sweat. But, in Shoot 'Em he carries a carrot at all times to make sure we know this movie is a cartoon. Certainly not a traditional Bugs Bunny star turn, but then there was only one Bugs, but enough cartoon-esquire violence to, as a comparison, make American Psycho seem a documentary,or maybe The Wild Bunch a haiku to male bonding. The title says most of it but does not suggest the humor found amid the gore, the sex amid the bodies, the decadence of the love interest and her special talent, or talents since one would hope that both instruments are operative. On second thought maybe less a Second Amendment love song than a La Leche league membership drive.

A body count that would make Joe Bob Briggs choke on his popcorn and ruin his end of movie review scorecard from the front seat of a 57 Chevy at a Texas drive in. A truly memorable body count, a paean to pistols, gun porn, head shots, chest shots, a barrel full of monkeys smörgåsbord of shooting scenes with bad guys dressed to their black nines carrying nines mowed down in ways that must have taken room fulls of writers weeks to top one massacre with another. Only major criticism other than to suspend belief for 97 minutes (or was 97 the number of bodies in the second warehouse scene)...a child in danger.

I cringe at even stubbed toes or whimpers from any child in any movie, it's a becoming a father thing I fear. But the child in danger is so cartoonish and so much of a MacGuffin that even weepy me gave up and went with the anti-Spock-ian parenting exhibited. Paul Giamatti as the bad guy, bad pores glistening in menace, all energizer bunny in summoning his black leathered minions to battle, bent on baby-cide, is terrific. Monica Belluci, reminding me of four of the top ten wet dreams ever caused by actresses before the age of thirty (all from the severely underrated 'Flash Gordon') playing living Viagra in a role that makes the male viewer think that he and the writer/director should have a drink and talk about women. And a black helicopter plot sufficiently divorced from reality as to allow two hundred uber violent deaths with scarcely a qualm from this viewer and enough of a fashionable issue or two to be able to argue that Shoot 'Em Up is worth seeing to less demented than you friends.

And, Clive, Sin/Children Clive, looking great, a great action hero, a great cartoon character, representing all of us in his hatred of the loutishness of 2007 reality. But unlike us doing something about it. Bad title, good movie, and I am torn, after seeing it between joining the NRA, the next anti gun violence rally on the south side, Googling wet nurses, or renting The Best of Bugs.


Move over, Quentin T., there's a new sheriff in town. With Shoot 'Em Up, director/writer Michael Davis takes the over-the-top violent action film genre and blows a blood soaked, mile-wide hole in it good an' proper, and that's just in the first 5 minutes, give or take a few.

This film is violent, sure, but as I always say, it's how a movie is done that makes the difference. Shoot 'Em Up proceeds from one dazzlingly outrageous scene to another with unflagging confidence, tons of panache, brilliantly warped humor and blazing originality, sweeping you, the lucky viewer, giddy and gleefully along.

The casting is genius as well, beginning with Clive Owen, who's dead-on here, with his ever-present carrot in hand, rescuing the (adorable) baby, getting the girl, killing the bad guys (who just keep coming like deranged vampire replicants), even solving The Mystery from the most obscure of clues, all while complaining about everything he hates, which ranges from "people who don't use their turn signals" to "a pussy with a gun in his hand."

And speaking of the great Paul Giamatti, he's in monumentally fine form here as Hertz, the self-described brilliant leader of the gunmen. Squallid and seedy beyond all comprehension, you just know he's having a blast (pun intended) with this part. After proving in his last few outings that he can carry a film and play anything, he gets to bask hardily in full venal mode, sneering, scowling and torturing his way into our hearts as only Giamatti can. There's a running bit in the film where his wife keeps calling him on his cell phone, usually while he's in the midst of gunning people down, and this has a really hilarious payoff toward the end - one of the funniest parts of the movie, in my estimation.

The film is shot in stark, sharp tones, making it look like a comic book come to life more than any film I've ever seen, while still using real actors. And there are sequences here that you have NOT witnessed before, speaking of that originality I mentioned earlier. The one which stood out most to me is the one where Clive Owen and Monica Bellucci (also perfect) are making love and the baddies bust in. In most films, this would pre-empt the love-making. In Shoot 'Em Up, they continue the act, which actually culminates while the bullets are flying. Worked for me.


Khamosh Pani will go down in Pakistani history as the most important work of art and politic since the country's inception. The story documents the era (1979) of the CIA-assisted killing of the democratically elected prime minister Bhutto and the installation of fundamentalist dictator General Zia ul-Haq. The film chronicles the death of love and the birth of hate as part of a continuing cycle of violence that has besieged that part of the world. Religious intolerance, bigotry and ignorance are the fierce villains of the movie. The film has managed to humanize the tragedy of the Pakistani people's struggle with fanaticism and imported agendas. What I particularly love about this film, besides the fact that it is technically remarkable, is the fact that it does not glorify death or killing. This is not a Bollywood or Lollywood melodrama. Beautiful punjabi language script adds to the authenticity of this true-to-life cinema representation of the people of the land. This film is brave to acknowledge the atrocities of displacement; of the violence against Sikhs and against women that was part of the partition of India and Pakistan. Well acted, well written and extremely well directed. Bravo!


There is a side to Pakistan most of us are blind to. At least visually.

Director Sabiha Sumar presents that side to us -- a desolate, barren Pakistan, a magnificent, sprawling wasteland worthy of a Sergio Leone classic. For someone used to the congested streets of an Indian metropolis, seeing this grand, hilly Pakistani village, full of whispered secrets and echoed threats holds a surreal poignancy.

In the Charkhi village of Punjab in Pakistan, life is quirky, quaint, and increasingly foreboding. The setting itself presents a paradox: there are fortresses available for youngsters to romantically rendezvous, but no place for a kafir (non-Muslim) to hide.

Khamosh Pani revolves around the life of a simple, middle-aged woman, Ayesha, played by Kirron Kher. She seems normal enough, a typical Pakistani lady, living the placid life of a widow, supporting her family by giving Quran lessons to neighbourhood children. As the film builds slowly into its plot, we begin to suspect the central protagonist is actually her wistful son, Saleem.

Saleem, played by Aamir Malik, looks exactly in the Jimmy Mistry (The Guru, East Is East) mold, just floppier, lazy, and intensely likable. With a boyish grin firmly in place, he is smitten with girl-next-door, the no-nonsense Zubeida, who's trying to goad him into getting a job.

As the two murmur besotted secrets to each other across the roofs of conveniently empty minarets, Saleem realises that Zubeidaa's dreams of going to college and fashioning her career and her own riches far outweigh his own. In fact, he doesn't have any dream at all, just shuffling through life listlessly. He needs a vocation, a higher cause to believe in.

At this crucial juncture in his youth, Charkhi's naïveté is shattered by the arrival of Islamic fundamentalists. We suddenly realize that the year is 1979, and we're told emotionally that Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto has just been hanged.

There is ample scope for over-dramatisation, but the scene has been handled with wonderful restraint -- a postman stands by his bicycle, seemingly lost. When Ayesha repeatedly asks him what's wrong, he just shakes his head and shows her the paper, muttering in disbelief that the prime minister has been hanged. Immediately, we're framed into uncannily familiar perspective:

General Zia's period of marshal law has begun.

As the Sikhs are allowed to cross the border and revisit their native places of worship, dissent and fundamentalism sets in deeper. Saleem is now one of them, a misguided boy strongly hanging on to a deluded version of Allah.

The film turns darker and more sombre as an important issue comes evocatively to the fore. A gentle visiting Sikh alludes to the prospect of some female relatives being left behind during Partition, but is silenced vehemently by those around him. It is an issue of pride, and we are awakened to the nightmare that families actually killed their own, sacrificing them brutally to avoid dishonor at the hands of the enemy.

The irony is painfully simple: the womanfolk were actually safer in the hands of the very enemy, whose attempt at dishonor was probably preferable to the slaughter their own families put them through.

Zubair (Navtej Johar), however, is a Sikh determined to find his long-lost elder sister, and is sure she lived around these parts. The film is based on true incidents of the time, and as we shuttle through flashback and the present, Khamosh Pani confronts us with information many of us are unaware of.

The film is subtle, and refreshingly free of hysteria, enough to make it one of the best films in the increasingly crowded Partition genre, and reminds us that the subject still has so much to explore. It's a film striking in its simplicity, unlike most recent attempts that usually peter off into melodrama or pander to clichés and even propaganda.

Most directors, with an eye on the festival circuit, try to exaggerate their viewpoints, and show off cinematic abilities. Mira Nair is a case in point. Here, the debutante filmmaker has made a commendable first effort, with visible sincerity. Her lead actress, Kher, has done an overwhelming job, underplayed but truly a wonderfully written role.

This is the first Pakistani film I've ever watched; Sabiha Sumar has made sure it won't be the last.


I am at a loss of words after watching this one which is more than a film, it is an experience therefore, the only words in which this masterpiece can be described are adjectives-mind blowing, shocking, great in narrative and style, simple and subtle, poignant, brilliant exposition. Here is finally a movie, that shocks you, surprises you, questions you, slaps you, make you cry, shows you a mirror-to sum up evoke strong responses. The film finally succeeds in speaking a universal language. Here No sides are taken but just roots you to the middle of the premise. It touched the epic proportions of earlier masterpieces Garam Hawa and Tamas, based on partition issues. Though an influence of Iranian new wave cinema is seen on film maker sabiha sumer yet it is an original piece. A superior product, a touching tale, a classic world cinema, indeed.. "Jinhe naaz hai Black par wo kahan hain".


This is an outstanding movie, illustrating life in rural Punjab in Pakistan and how the ugly scepter of religious fundamentalism raises its head and disrupts the peaceful flow of village life under General Zia. At the every end, it refers to the current version of an old story under yet another General, Musharaf.

The central story is about Ayesha, a Sikh girl abducted and left behind during the Partition, who has made a new life for herself in Pakistan, being forced to take on a new identity, marrying one of her abductors, and raising a son she dotes upon. The return of her long lost brother as a pilgrim and the taking over of the village by fanatics ends up destroying the life she had created. Kirron Kher in the lead role is very good and all the actors do a great job.

My only concern is that viewers without a close understanding of the India Pakistan Partition may miss out some of the subtleties. That however did not stop the judges at a European film festival from awarding the best actress prize to Kirron Kher.


Perhaps the first south Asian film that has had such a lasting impression on me, Khamosh Pani has hardly received the glory it truly deserves. Watching the film leaves you senseless for about half an hour and then it knocks all the wind out of you.

Khamosh Pani takes the viewer to a small village in Pakistan where life evolves. Specifically it focuses on Ayesha and her son Saleem and their relationship. Ayesha never goes to the village well to draw water while Saleem gets seduced by Islamic fundamentalists and transforms from a love sick puppy to the man he thinks he wants to be.

Sabiha Sumar, perhaps one of the best directors in the subcontinent, tells us the story of a small village in Pakistan. With perhaps one of the most powerful issues to deal with, Sumar displays true genius by making everything seem so subtle and hauntingly real. Perhaps, the greatest strength lies in convincing the audience that the statement need not be made in black and white and in this respect Sumar shines.

To say that the acting performances were excellent would be the understatement of the century. One watches in amazement at how real and authentic each character is. The mind knows that what it sees are actors and yet it refuses to believe what it knows. Every single character, from an extra to the leads adds to the tremendous energy that the film brings with it. Kirron Kher as Ayesha/Veero is stunning, so much so that one cannot imagine her as anyone else. Aamir Ali Malik is another actor who plays with the audience, seducing them and disturbing them through the course of the film As an Indian separated from the partition by two generations I can't really say that I feel the pain that my mother does when she sees a film such as this, I have heard stories of my grand aunt who was attacked and mutilated by a mob in Lahore when my mothers family had to leave for India. Perhaps my lack of sentimental attachment makes me see it a little more objectively. Khamosh Pani has exposed me to some of this pain and while it may not be my own I can feel it. But the question that arose in my mind is that those that were around when this bloodshed (on both sides) occurred have mostly died or are dying, will we succeeding generations ever know this pain? The pain of leaving behind a wife, killing your own daughter, leaving her to be raped, Living in another country when that which was once a part of you lives somewhere else. How can I fight for this when I don't know what its like? Khamosh Pani made me feel this pain for a few days; perhaps we need more reminders such as these so that we can experience the pain to forget.


I saw Khamosh Pani on DVD released in India by this firm called Excel Home Videos. Unlike other DVD biggies released (like Parineeta, Dor, 2046, Hero, Moulin Rouge, Ice Age, etc) released by the same firm, Khamosh Pani begins in complete silence. First, there's the firm's logo, then, the warning notice, and then, the main menu. So far, things have progressed in pin-drop silence. I choose the subtitles On option as the film is in Punjabi. I am informed that Kirron Kher won the best actress award at Locarno for her performance in Khamosh Pani. This information, too, comes noiselessly. When no sound emanates from my 5.1 home theater system I begin to panic. My three-hundred-and-forty-nine rupees gone (That is the price of this DVD). And then, Just like my heart beats gaining momentum, some soft music is audible through the speakers. I relax, and as the film proceeds, I understand why it is called Khamosh Pani, and why silence is so much integral to its plot.

The year is 1979. Ayesha (Kirron Kher) is a middle-aged Muslim widow in this village called Charkhi in the Punjab region of Pakistan. She has a teenage son called Saleem (Aamir Malik) who she loves very much. Saleem wishes to marry Zubeida (Shilpa Shukla), an ambitious young girl with dreams of attending a college, getting a job in an office and owning a mixer and a ceiling fan. Ayesha has spent her entire life in silence. There's a secret she's hidden from everyone. A secret, parts of which come to the viewers in the form of some very disturbing images shot in black and white, showing young girls running, screaming, and a really intriguing visual of the round surface of water in a deep well.

There is communal harmony in this village of Muslims and Sikhs, till two strangers from Lahore come to inform the Muslim villagers of the new martial laws laid down by the then President, General Zia-Ul-Haq. Matters are worsened by the arrival of Sikh pilgrims from India who are often teased by some intolerant Muslims of the village. One Sikh man (Navtej Johar) is looking for his elder sister Veero who had gone missing during the Partition in 1947, a time when Sikh, Hindu and Muslim men were killing their own wives, daughters and sisters or were forcing them to kill themselves in order to keep them from being raped by the men of the enemy community as dishonoring the womenfolk of a particular community was seen as the easiest way of dishonoring that community altogether.

In the meanwhile, Saleem, gullible and impressionable youth that he is, has gone neck-deep in his involvement with the two fundamentalists. He has grown a bushy beard, learns to shoot guns, prays regularly, and cannot stand the sight of non-Muslims. Zubeida fails to understand what has gone wrong with the boy who had wanted to marry her, for Saleem starts disapproving of her plans to pursue further studies and earn her own livelihood. To make matters worse, Saleem questions his own mother about her origins.

The performances are commendable. Kirron Kher truly deserves the awards that she's won for Khamosh Pani. Ditto for the other actors. However, what I liked the most is the way this film has been shot. The scenes are grainy, giving the film a very raw look. This is more striking as the film deals with a very strong theme and such raw in-your-face treatment gives the feeling of actually seeing thing live. Here I should make a special mention of the flashbacks, the secrets shot in black and white I was talking about. They are not exactly black & white, they carry a hint of sepia. The visuals in these flashbacks are not very distinct, very much like Ayesha's memories which are old and unclear, yet unforgotten.

The scene showing a a woman standing on the well's edge, with dust billowing all around her, spreading her arms like Christ, is truly haunting.

Another scene that stands out is the one showing a lone Saleem offering Namaaz on the mosque patio. It has been shot in blue (or is it natural moonlight?). The cinematography of Khamosh Pani reminded me of two other movies I've seen -- Lars Von Trier's Breaking the Waves (for the grainy images) and The Ring (for the raw home video-like feel).

Finally, there's one scene which will haunt me for a few more months at least. I can't say too much about it as it might give the plot away. This scene has been done in blue (natural moonlight?). This makes the character appear very ghostly, like an apparition. It's amazing, and to enhance the effect, the scene doesn't last more than a few seconds.

Khamosh Pani is aptly titled. And the khamoshi (silence) that runs through the movie is justified. This silence makes questions grow inside one's head, it makes one think. I can't believe how I got such a beautiful movie so cheap? My money has been recovered. The silence of Khamosh Pani doesn't scare me anymore.


Nothing prepares you for the subtlety and searing honesty of this film. There is something ennobling about watching it. The director gives us vignettes of life in Pakistan, circa 1980 and 1999, and paints the portrait of a country in the grip of a ruinous Islamization. General Zia-ul-Haq took the country backward by several years through his repressive policies and Sabiha Sumar shows us glimpse of what he did to the country.

In a film so subtly wrought, it is unusual to be struck particularly by acting performances but for Shilpa Shukla is a revelation. It is a splendidly understated performance and I must say her sensuality stirred me too.


First of all I would like to thank Sabiha Sumar and Kiron Kher for presenting a wonderful masterpiece. This movie moved my emotions, it was so touching that it put me in tears. Kiron Kher's role as Ayesha alias Veero was excellent, she was the perfect fit for the role, no one else could replace her.I am proud to know that there are people like you who stand up for the truth and I thank you for all your efforts and passion. There is no doubt that your recent achievements will be spoken of for some more time to come and the admiration for your accomplishments is felt by all of us.Please accept my heartiest congratulations for your success.


This film was quite a pleasant surprise. I would recommend it to every one as it certainly is good cinema. A class above the stereotypical Bollywood genre you would normally expect out of South Asia, this Pakistani film explores the origins of religious fundamentalism in Pakistan along with the horrors following Partition that still scar the memories of many in the region. I would probably rate this above 1947 Earth and certainly consider it to be the most influential movies I have seen on Partition. Excellent camera work, fluent and appropriate use of Punjabi script and great top notch acting by Kiron Kher along with many veteran Pakistani actors will leave you full of emotion after you see the film. The subtitles could be a bit better for the Non-Punjabi viewer, and i think a little more spotlight should have been put on how and why the religious fundamentalist gathered such momentum in a nation leaning more towards Moderate rule after Bhutto's regime. The fact that these groups had strong economic and social backing from the U.S at the time, as they were the ones fighting the war against communist Russia should have been brought out more plainly for the viewer not familiar with the politics and history of the region at the time. And it is these same groups that received such full fledged support from the U.S at the time and painted as 'Holy Warriors' by the Western Media that are now considered terrorist organizations in the post 9/11 era. This point that the U.S played a vital hand in strengthening Islamic fundamentalist organizations under Zia's rule was i think not driven home to the extent it could have been. But all in all a wonderful first effort by Sabiha Sumar, i would give it a 9 out of 10.


Khamosh Pani is really beautifully made movie. It's most important part is it's such a real shooting locations and perfect story line. It brings up the important issues associated with Indo-Pak partition. It's beauty is enhanced by it's wonderful and soul touching music. Most beautiful being the nawaaz when saleem is sitting on the roof of some sort of fort. As you watch the movie you go through some questions related to general conceptions of religion, human existence and some events related to partition. This thing makes the movie worth watching as many times you want to see it.

Over all the best movie I have ever seen.


Stunning work by director Sabiha Sumar, I was blown away by the brutal and painfully upfront reality of this film. This film is stripped of all the glitz and glamour yet still it manages to be a beautiful portrayal of the harsh reality of life. I much appreciated the wedding scenes and the Mujra (yes, as intense as this film is, it still manages to chuck in a cute Mujra and a beautiful wedding) scene, they sort of prepare you for the depressing nature of what's to come.

Whomever cast Kiron Kher in 'Rang De Basanti' must have fallen in love with her heart-wrenching performance in 'Khamosh Pani' first before doing so. This character reminded me so much of her character from 'RDB' - a beautiful mother, powerless (except for prayer) and helplessly watching her son go down a destructive path. She is strikingly intense yet thankfully subdued as the single aging mother of a young boy named Saleem who is coming of age and has begun to keep secrets from her. At first, it all seems harmless when we find out that Saleem has only been sneaking away to meet with his sweetheart Zubeida (played by equally intense Shilpa Shukla) in an abandoned building, their regular meeting spot where they sit and dream about how their lives will be, and do other things just like young people in love do. But it isn't until a close friend of Saleem's introduces him to a group of dangerously Islam fanatics that the trouble starts.

The on screen transformations is particularly spectacular, in terms of the way Saleem looks when the film starts (a beautiful young man), to the way he looks when the fanaticism begins to swallow the love he has for his mother and lady love as well as for life as he knew it (a ghost of the boy he used to be) and finally, years later when a chanced glancing at a telly screen leads Zubeida to spot the man she once loved giving a religious speech on a political channel (a mostly unrecognisable Saleem). While much props should be given to Sumar for brilliantly capturing such vital pictographic scenes, actor Aamir Ali Malik should be lauded as well, for throwing himself held long into this character. Kiron Kher is so good in this film that it is impossible to put her brilliant acting into words. To say that she was stellar, would be an understatement.

The religious war between India and Pakistan is not something new, but what baffled me was the level of ignorance that the Muslims displayed in this film. Making fun of Sikhs and calling them the best friends of Lice was just out of line! Calling them unbelievers just because your religion is different from theirs? All the killing and fighting. It all seems senseless because God listens to us all regardless of the way we pray to him. It was so heart-wrenching to watch what happened to the women and children when the Muslims came to take over Pakistan, those scenes were very hard to take. And when Ayeesha/Veero (Kher's character) finally caved into the pressure, it was hard not to shed a tear in disbelief. She was sold out. Sold out by her brothers, sold out by her son, sold out by her father, sold out ignorance and the blindness of mankind.


In 1947, the Indian sub-continent was partitioned into Muslim West and East Pakistan (later Bangladesh ) divided by Hindu-dominated India . Families were uprooted and mass migrations of Muslims and Hindus led to violence, rape, looting, and abductions of women on both sides. The official estimate of the number of abducted women was placed at 50,000 Muslims in India and 33,000 Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan . Some of the women were forced to commit suicide to protect the family "honor" while others ended up marrying their abductors out of self protection, a theme dramatized in Silent Waters, a film by U.S.-educated Pakistani director Sabiha Sumar. Sumar has taken the film all over Pakistan, to cities and small towns alike, in hopes of stimulating a debate about the nature and causes of Islamic extremism.

Set in Pakistan in 1979, the film traces the roots of fundamentalism in Pakistan to the overthrow and execution of Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and the ascension of fundamentalist General Zia ul-Haq. It tells the story of a Muslim widow Ayesha (Kirron Kher) who is losing her son to a group of Islamic extremists and the tragic consequences in her own life. Saleem (Aamir Malik, a Gael Bernal look-alike) is a carefree 18-year old courting Zubeida (Shilpa Shukla), an intelligent and ambitious teenager. When his girlfriend goes away to an all-girls college, he is left at home to think about his future and dreams of a life of doing more than working in the fields. Ultimately, his harsh poverty, peer pressure, and a sense of unfulfilled ambition make him a vulnerable target for the Muslim clerics.

Recruited by the zealots in his own village, he quickly becomes an aggressive jihadist, abruptly turning his back on his mother and his girlfriend. Several scenes show the growing fear and intolerance the movement spreads in the name of racial purity: the sudden building of a brick wall around a girls school playground, and the bullying of shop owners to close their doors during prayer time. According to Sumar, "There was just a kind of fear that led people to stop thinking. When fear becomes pervasive, you stop questioning." Ayesha becomes haunted by flashbacks, a recurring dream of a young girl screaming and running from a well. When a group of Sikh pilgrims come to town to pray at the village mosque, enmity flares up again and Ayesha is forced to confront a dark secret in her past and a little-known chapter of violence against women in Pakistan 's history.

Silent Waters is a strong indictment of the intolerance and the abuse of women caused by religious differences, yet its potential is not fully realized. Aside from the introduction of Bollywood-style songs and dances at the beginning that feels out of place, both good guys and bad guys are shown without any nuance or dimensionality, especially the militants who are little more than caricatures, and the motivation behind Saleem's easy recruitment is unclear. In spite of these aesthetic considerations, Silent Waters is an important film that helps us to better appreciate the vulnerability of women during times of political crises and the factors that may have led to the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. If it encourages us to learn more about the history and times, it will have served an extremely useful purpose. It just could have been so much more.


khamosh pani is among those few films which really matter. After watching his film i couldn't sleep properly for next few nights. it was disheartening to know that Pakistan, which has a similar culture to India underwent major changes culturally during Zia-ul-haq's regime. General Zia in his efforts to avenge the loss of east Pakistan tried to undo any so called Indian influence on social structure by turning Pakistan into a theocratic state. all the radical changes brought in name of islamisation further gave rise to problems which were created by fanatic minds..like tali bans in Afghanistan or i.s.i sponsored terrorism in Kashmir. Though khamosh pani doesn't tackle these issues directly but shows a changing social scenario in Pakistan during the seventies & eighties.this movie subtle also reflects the futility of partition & insecurities of the time.It should be a lesson to all the people who give more importance to theology than humanity.


Well all the editing and technical job done by western people has really helped this movie in making it a treat to watch. Though the end is sad but movie leaves various questions open: 1.When Kiron Kher who was forcibly stripped of her identity once finds that she is once again social pariah due to no fault of hers ,anguish and bewilderment at her face are really powerful. 2.The girl cycling outside the Jehadi meeting shows how oblivious world remains when dangers like breed in our surroundings. 3.There is marked similarity in the speech of Leader in the conference and interview of Amir on the TV in the end.Same vague things about identity of nation. 4.Encounter of ayesha with her brother where she asks her that after killing girls to save their HONOUR what was he seeking now?.This scene is superb. 5.Scen at marriage party gives a good glimpse of social interactions in Punjab also how feudal elements still hold sway. Overall I would like to see more movies by this director.In fact world wars' horror are kept alive by superb movies based on that period.Partition of India, an equally momentous event which left behind a trail of human suffering should be depicted in more films of this type so that young people and people outside Indain subcontinent are sensitized that violence and religion never mix well.


"Mysterious Skin" is a movie that I heard very little about. Never saw the trailer, never saw a poster nothing. Until one day I was just looking up movies online and I came across this film. I looked up the website, watched the trailer, and said I want to see this. So I didn't get around to it when I lived in California since it came and went very quickly however the film did show up in a little theater about 5 miles from my house so I figured I have to check this film out and so I did.

"Mysterious Skin" is the story of two boys Brian (Brady Corbet) and Neil (Joseph Gordon Levitt). Brian can't remember what happened to him when he was younger but he knows something bad happened. Neil on the other hand remembers every second of what happened and has let that take control of his life. The story continues to show Brian as a nerdy kid trying to find out what happened to him and Neil turns into a hustler. But in the end the horrifying truth comes out and their lives are changed forever.

When this film ended, I just stood there and said wow that was really messed up and I felt depressed. The story is so raw and graphic. I don't think I saw anything this graphic since I first saw "Irreversible" a few years back. The movie feels so real and the events that occur to these two kids seem so common in today's society. I think it really hits home and that's why this film works so well.

The lead performances by Brady Corbet and Joseph Gordon Levitt are terrific. Both are extremely believable and well acted. It's nice how they each played a character so different from one another. After watching Levitt in this film, "Manic" and "Latter Days," I am pretty convinced that the guy is one hell of an actor although he needs to stick to the independent films. And the same thing goes for Brady Corbet who starred in my favorite film two years back called "Thirteen." Also I feel it's necessary to comment on Michelle Trachtenberg here who played Neil's partner in crime Wendy. I really don't like Mrs. Trachtenberg probably because I saw her in the god-awful "Euro Trip" and in "Buffy" however in this movie she was pretty good. I think she played the supporting role well.

Gregg Araki was both the writer and director on the film. I must say the man knows how to make a graphic and disturbing film. The movie at times is hard to watch because of how disturbing some of the scenes are. I haven't seen any of Mr. Araki's other films but I have been reading online and have heard that this is his masterpiece. I can't really say that I liked the film because this isn't a movie you come out of and say oh yea that was wonderful! You kind of come out of the theater saying man that was really f*cked up, kind of like the movie "Thirteen" although this movie is much more graphic. It's a great work of art as far as film goes and tells a deep and disturbing story well. The thing like I mentioned above that makes the film work is that this type of stuff happens in the world today which again is why "Thirteen" worked. It's shocking and disturbing but it's only that way because it feels and seems real.

In the end, I think it's a really good movie with powerful performances and a great story. The movie is not for the weak hearted. I myself felt a bit disturbed by the film. The subject matter isn't very happy and neither is the story. The film is extremely graphic and raw. Some of the more disturbing scenes seem to run on for a long time which means that the film is working on its audience. I can't really pick a target audience for this film but if you like movies that are real and raw then you should check this out. This is a great movie that I think many would not be able to handle but for the few who can I think it really delivers.

MovieManMenzel's final rating for "Mysterious Skin" is a 9/10.


I have a feeling that most of the reviewers here have not read the text of "Mysterious Skin" by Scott Heim. Doing so would be most helpful in viewing this film.

Out of sheer luck, I happened to find a screening in Las Vegas, almost a year after the initial release, having finished the book only one day before. It was an interesting experience from the start.

One got the feeling of stepping into an adult cinema, instead of a semi-mainstream release. I was surrounded by sprinkling of older guys watching an NC-17 matinée. A first for me, for sure. The movie captures the feel of the book spot on. Director Araki should be commended for staying so close to the text. Hardly anything was left out and what was deleted did not detract from the storyline in the least.

Heim's novel deals with subject matter that most people would prefer to deny exists. But back here in the real world, it does. On screen we see the sensualization of an 8 year old boy, along with his sexual fantasy. Not for the squeamish, but Araki communicates this brilliantly without diluting the message. Most people would shy away from a story that has an 8 year old boy having an orgasm as he watched his mother have intercourse, but Araki does not. And somehow he makes it okay.

Hats off to the boys cast as the young Neil and Brian. Chase Ellison captures the emotions of his character very well. He captures the darkness of Neil McCormick incredibly, and translates perfectly from the written page. We sense the confusion turning into acceptance and then, desire. It made me squirm in my seat. George Webster as young Brian is great.

I can't imagine a lot of actors lining up to play the boylover coach, but Bill Sage does very well. In the story, his role doesn't seem like a pure predator, but clearly he has devices at work. He's in the right place at the right time.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is a marvel is this film. There was a genuine quality to his character, an aloofness that comes with knowledge at an early age that is hard to put into words. Brady Corbett successfully brought his youthful character along, and I think his interactions with the other characters is spot on for someone who had had an experience like his.

Critics will say that this film glorifies pedophilia. I disagree. I think it shows the effects of pedophilic relationship on different people, and how they react to it. It is a slice of life, albeit a very dark one, that does occur each and every day. Approach with caution and an open mind.


As a movie lover and social worker, I was really moved throughout this film - for most of this film - by the subject matter and by the powerful portrayal and production of these characters. Overall, this is a highly rated movie and one can only wonder at the mentality of persons in Australia who pushed for the banning of this film. This is a realistic account of the affects on the victims of child abuse and tells a compelling story of their plight. But don't expect a happy ending; there is some resolution but you know the battle continues and their struggle to overcome will go on. (I'm getting emotional again just thinking about the last scene.) I work with young people (15-25) who have been abused, often by their own parents, and placed into the care system. However, I have had clients who have then been abused in care as well. It is hard to reconcile such young people but gaining justice is quite central, as is a belief they are accepted and worthwhile human beings. Because they may have been sexually aroused during the abuse they can often feel guilty and to blame. They often internalise these feelings and depending on their personalities they will implode against themselves (drugs etc) and/or become de-sensitised to certain feelings and take risks. The boys in this film portray these two dichotomies and they do it very well. 10 stars.


Not since HAPPINESS has such a difficult subject been tackled head on! Without spoiling any of the film, I will just say that I was engrossed in the film, shocked at how far the director was able to go, and heartened by how many issues he was able to raise, and show so many possible effects of what the characters go through. There were so many situations in this film that I had never seen portrayed before, that this proves how much film-makers avoid so many issues.

A familiar, likable cast are taken deep into dark territory. I enjoyed all the performances and believed the characters, even though I had seen all the actors before on TV. The music is just wonderful - from the guy behind The Cocteau Twins - it adds to the dreamlike/nightmarish quality of the film. It's unusual enough to add to the uniqueness of this film - it really is ground-breaking - and Robin Guthrie's music/The Cocteau Twins haven't been used before in movies (though you may have recognised Liz Fraser's vocals in the last Lord of the Rings soundtrack).

This film impressed me the most in 2004 - I hope everyone gets a chance to see it!


MYSTERIOUS SKIN  REVIEW 7/6/05

In his new film Greg Araki uses a prudent ploy to snag and reel you in: having the visuals effusively speak and the screenplay divulge the least amount of information necessary to keep the story evolving. Words can only reveal so much, while Araki's images display an almost unbearable amount of visceral material, exploiting vibrant color, alluring texture, dark and light, the brooding and harrowing eyes of Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and the handsome modesty of Brady Corbet.

The film resonates on a level of rawness unseen and unfelt since Cuesta's "L.I.E." or Solondz's "Storytelling." The film is jarringly penetrative and pervasive: the visuals in your mind play over repeatedly and the disconcerting but intellectually uplifting feeling "Mysterious Skin" infuses lies active long after you leave the theater. The film is not easy to digest. Seeing that there is pervasive sexual exposure between adults, as well as between adults and kids (though discreetly handled), this film will repulse many viewers. This film also had to be made.

Neil (Gordon-Levitt) and Brian's (Corbet) story starts in the early 1980s when they are only eight-years-old. Neil's little league baseball coach initiates a sexual relationship, of which (most likely to the consternation of several audience members) Neil actually recounts a rosy-colored remembrance: he enjoyed it. Brian that same year describes how his perpetual and mysterious string of blackouts and bloody noses began one rainy night after a baseball game.

The story moves forward to when Neil and Brian are at adolescence's conclusion. We discover that Neil has grown up to be both gay and a hustler, while asexual Brian's free time is taken up seeking the source of and resolution to his insoluble physical ailments. Brian soon deduces that aliens abducted him and meets a fellow abductee, Avalyn (Mary Lynn Rajskub), with whom he finds ephemeral solace.

Neil and Brian's story act in parallel, moving forward and backward over time, but never disjointedly. Neil eventually moves to New York, while his pining friend Eric (Jeff Licon) actually befriends Brian and an endearing friendship ensues. Neil's (unappeasable) pursuit of everlasting male love ends in the most unlikely of places: back home. Brian's pursuit of the truth leads him to, predictably, Neil. Araki exquisitely handles the ending (not divulged here) with the appropriate effusion of tendered emotion by the two main actors (warning: though the film's trailer subtlety gives away the finish).

I cannot give enough plaudits to the two male leads. A long way from "3rd Rock", Joe's sensuous flirtations and dynamic eyes mate well with Brady's tranquil, naive, yet profound, disposition. Brady's last scene with his character's father, as well as the climax, demonstrates his aptitude and assured longevity as an actor (beyond "Thunderbirds").

"Mysterious Skin" evidences many matches made-in-heaven: from film and director to material and actor to music and film. The film is entirely amoral, but not immoral. It is also a difficult film to watch. Many will cast it aside as tripe and trash (along with other morally relative films), but those fortunate enough to engage themselves in the movie's discussion will revel in it long after the credits' close.


Amazing. I was expecting another sexually charged adrenaline infused dark comedy a la Doom Generation or an ironic look at relationships in the post-modern world like Splendor. Instead I found a more mature, calmer tale. Still funny, but muted, dark but based on the darker parts of human nature in reality... The performances were unbelievable. Joseph Gordon-Levitt came across with a combination of grit and beauty, anger and happiness that reminded me of Colin Farrell. The cockiness of youth, the sadness of child abuse, and a realistic recognition of prepubescent sexuality. The opening sequence reminded me of something in my youth - nothing specific it just left me with this certain feeling. I hope this is a sign of things to come....


"Mysterious Skin" is right on the mark. Araki explores ten years in the lives of two youths who were abused as children. Araki shows how each youth struggles to get a grip on some sort of normality in life. Importantly he also shows the abuser's self-justification process.

We are given a hell of a lot of brain exercise during this film. It is by equal amounts compelling, moving, beautiful and shocking.

We see that although the youths' parents were not directly to blame for the abuse, they certainly contributed through indifference or inaction. Hopefully viewers will be strongly inclined to take a proactive interest in the empowerment and protection of their children. Child abuse affects the victim for life.

Mysterious Skin deserves to reach the widest possible audience, but I would caution that victims of sexual abuse may find this film to be very traumatic. They should go with a trusted friend, and have access to suitable counseling.


I have not read the book so my comments have only to do with the film. I was deeply, deeply impressed and moved by this film. This ranks among the best movies I've seen in the last several years, including "Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN", "ETERNAL SUNSHINE" and "PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE".

The film has a tone that is totally original, bizarre, and dreamily beautiful. It is frank, candid, unexpectedly brutalizing...and, just as often, unexpectedly funny, strange...and even (so strange to admit) uplifting. I say strange, because this movie is more hard-core than any American film I've seen since, perhaps, "Happiness". And yet it's so much more heartfelt, kind-hearted, and yes, even "loving", than that aforementioned hyper-toxic indictment of New Jersey suburbia.

"Mysterious Skin" has scenes and images that I don't think I'll soon forget. It also has bizarre parallels and clues that didn't occur to me until hours after I'd seen it. SPOILER: For example, The scene where Brian is compelled to slide his hand up into the body cavity of a dead deer. WOW. The context is shattering.

The scenes involving pedophilia were unbelievably potent and disturbing. I don't know how Araki managed to shoot these sequences while retaining the innocence of such young, innocent performers. I mean, it comes as close to kiddie-porn as anything I've seen on film. And yet Araki handles it with such grace, strangeness, and "you-are-there" subjectivity, there's no way you can dismiss it as pornography. The perfect amount of restraint. The perfect amount of revulsion and confusion mixed with the tragic sexuality of the moment. I can easily see this movie being banned in various places. Oh well, that is the world we live in. Whoever dismisses this film without seeing it, it is their sad loss. This is the wisest, bravest, most honest and heartbreaking portrayal of childhood trauma ever put on film.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is AMAZING in this film. It's like he rose from the world of TV sitcoms to become, all at once, the best young actor working in film today. Seriously. No hyperbole here. He has everything he needs to be the next De Niro. The effortless body language, those impenetrable eyes, his turn-on-a-dime delivery. He is THAT GOOD. I read somewhere, someone comparing him to a young Colin Farrell. Please. The kid's only 22 and he's already 10 times the actor Farrell is. He's so good, in fact, that he could very well be a teen hustler from an HBO documentary. Beyond realism. Levitt completely lives in the "mysterious skin" of his character.

I'll comment on one other scene, and yeah, I'm gonna SPOIL it, but don't worry, it's not much of a spoiler. This scene really blew me away.

Neil (Levitt) has just picked up a John, played by Billy Drago. (You'll probably recognize this guy...he's super-creepy looking, and yet also terrifyingly cool & inscrutable...he played Capone's main henchman Frank Nitti in THE UNTOUCHABLES) He joins the John back at his stark-white apartment, and a scene which seems destined for tension, dread and horror...suddenly becomes beautiful, incredibly sad, and transcendent. To the point where, after this scene, I realized I wasn't just watching a "cool" Sundance Indie...I wasn't just watching a Gregg Araki film... I wasn't catching the latest "trendy indie" at the Sunset 5 in west Hollywood, surrounded by hipsters and shock-hounds. I was, in fact, witnessing a movie that transcended all of these fashionable labels. It only happens once in a blue moon, but when I saw this film, it definitely happened: I realized I was watching a work of art.


Gregg Araki's "Mysterious Skin" is a film that dares to point out the lasting effects of what a pedophile will inflict on a young person that will last a whole lifetime. Mr. Araki has adapted Scott Heim's novel with great style. In spite of the strong material presented in the film, it's never lewd or cheap, or in your face, that perhaps in another director's hands could have been exploited for shock value.

The film follows Neil, a young man who has been sexually abused by his little league coach. At the same time, there is a parallel story of another young man, Brian, who can't comprehend the way his life has turned when something happened to him a long time ago without being able to understand, having lost memory of a few hours in a fateful summer day years ago, when the same man abused him.

In Brian's case, his life has been scarred because the trauma caused by that monster to his young mind, has created havoc in his life. He is not sexually active; sex does not seem to interest him. Not even a young woman, Avalyn, who is interested in him, is able to get him aroused. Avalyn takes Brian to see a dead cow, in a scene that is something not to be believed, that holds part of the hidden secret this troubled soul is carrying with him.

Neil, who had a boyish crush on the coach, grows up fully aware he is gay. Neil is sexually active in the little Kansas town he lives. The only outlet for him is to follow Wendy, his best friend, to New York, where he becomes a male hustler practicing what appears to be unprotected sex, and at the end being beaten by an brutish trick that almost could have killed him.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Neil. This young actor kept reminding us of a young Keanu Reeves. Brady Corbet is Brian. Both young actors do an amazing work portraying their characters. Elizabeth Shue is seen briefly as Neil's single mother. Michelle Trachtenberg and Jeffrey Licon are seen as Wendy and Eric, who are Neil's best friends in the small town.

This is an important film as it reveals to what extent some people will go to harm and corrupt small children. Mr. Araki is to be congratulated for bringing the story to the screen.


Certain topics  in this case pedophilia  are very tricky when it comes to an adaptation on screen: it's very easy to go over the top and make something purely shocking; that's probably the biggest challenge, simply trying to portray the story without annihilating the audience. There are a few good examples of this, perhaps the "safe" ones: Brockeback Mountain, Philadelphia or Crash, seem to have found a balance between the delicacy of the topics and the need to take it to the audience in an effective, powerful, way.

In Mysterious skin we're pushed deep into the lives of Neil (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and Brian (Brady Corbet), two young men with a common background, although they don't know it. Neil is the great character of the picture, partly because it is he that goes on the strangest and more dangerous journey, or simply because of Levitt's performance: his strangeness in every aspect of life, without ever being numb or absent; the way he wears his clothes and his body, always hitching and always agitated; simply the look on his face, smart but lost. Throughout the movie we see the endless encounters that Neil has, going deeper in each one,and continuously loosing himself. It comes to a point where death seems to be near by.

Maybe it's just a little over the top. Maybe there was no other way. I remember that - in quite a childish way - creeping back from the theater, towards ordinary life, seemed a relief: not having to deal with that weigh anymore, feeling slightly sick or oppressed by life, finally done with that journey under the skin


I have seen this film twice and was very moved by the heartfelt performance of Joseph Gordon-Levitt as the troubled teen. Everyone in the film is at their best, and the director seems to have a clear vision of what he wants the viewer to see and feel. In the beginning, he takes us through the start of the kids problems, using young actors with a remarkable likeness to their older counterparts. He then slowly shows the results these experiences have have had on the kids as teenagers. The film is not easy nor pleasant to watch, but is never boring. I can't give away any plot details and spoil the film, but I will say it is a very strong NC17, unrated, and if you are not moved by the final ten minutes, you will never be affected by anything.


Mysterious Skin (2004) directed by Gregg Araki is powerful, shocking and absolutely convincing in every detail movie about two teenagers that were deeply affected by the events of one long hot summer of their childhood; events that one of them could not forget and the other desperately tried to remember. Ten years later, their lives could not be more different - Neil (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) has became a gay hustler, cynical, manipulative but charismatic, while Brian (Brady Corbet), nervous and shy believes that he was abducted by the aliens for some strange experiments.

The film like this requires very good performances from all cast members and it's got them from everybody but Gordon-Levitt is simply the shining star and I'll make sure from now on to check out all his new movies.


Watching this movie as an 18-year-old girl, who still has a lot to learn about sex and the world that it creates, I took a lot from this film. Mysterious Skin, based on the novel by Scott Heim, takes on the topic of child molestation and how different victims deal with it throughout their lives.

The film centers around two characters: Neil McCormick and Brian Lackey. Together once in their childhood, they now live in separate worlds but share a deep, dark connection. Neil, who dominates the story, is a fascinating, unique teenager who developed a fixation on older men very early on in his life. He was sexually abused as a young child, and, as he gets older, it remains with him in whatever he does. He lives life as a rambunctious, dark, teenage hustler. Brian, who was also abused, can not remember it at all and, instead, believes he was abducted by aliens and he spends his entire life trying to figure out answers.

Towards the end of the film, in a beautiful scene that captures all the true pain of an adolescent in about three minutes, life slowly brings these two back together to re-live what happened to them as children and discover what it meant to both of them.

The main factor that contributes to the greatness of this film is the acting. Especially by the two main characters Neil, played by Joesph Gordon-Levitt, and Brian, played by Brady Corbet. The two young actors literally transformed into their characters and deliver the kind of acting that forces the viewers to forget their watching two actors and are merely watching two people. Gordon-Levitt was particularly brilliant in his role. He stole every scene as the intriguing Neil McCormick and makes you scared of him but also begging for him to appear back on screen. It is, by far, the best acting of his career.

Although many scenes are incredibly (and I mean incredibly) hard to watch, it is, in a sense, important to understand that this exists in our world. Sex is a mysterious thing, and it can often turn people into maniacs or lost souls. Director/Screenwriter, Gregg Araki, Gordon-Levitt, and Corbet all agree in the auto-commentary for the film that the scenes that were filmed throughout Neil and Brian's childhood were shot in a sort of fantastical, distorted way to capture how adults look back on childhood. During childhood, every experience is looked at in an innocent way and even looking back on those experiences, adults continue to see them in that sort of naive light. Childhood almost becomes like a fantasy, and even when awful things happen to a child, they see it in a child-like way. As the film progresses, and as the characters grow older, it becomes more clear and real, just as life does.

But the film is not just about childhood abuse. It is about the destruction of innocence, and how it affects people. It is about discovering what's real and finally coming to terms with reality. It is about leaving childhood behind and stepping into the adult world. And it is also about the connections and bonds we create with each other during our lives and how distance and time do not break them. Every element of the film is beautiful-the music, the look, the feel, the acting-it all comes together to create a film that is almost like watching a living work of art.


After seeing this film, you cant help but feel something. From reading comments on the message boards I've noticed it range from feeling repulsion to feeling awe. Personally, I feel in awe of the whole film and its actors portrayal of the sensitive issues within. Levitts and Corbets acting is amazing to say the least. Both of their roles show the opposite ends of how people deal with such a shocking event. Neil manages to ooze sex and allure even though he is just trying to ease the pain of his past by embracing it and letting it control who he is. Even by believing what happened to him was an act of love and how happy he was to feel that special. Where as Brian believes he was abducted by aliens, and experimented on. Which explains his random nose bleeds, asexual orientation and withdrawing into himself (feeling he is the only person to experience this event). It all leads to a conclusion you can see happening but that doesn't take away from the films emotional impact one bit. Tractenberg and Licon are also worth seeing the film for. Its just a shame the two couldn't have more screen time (I gotta buy the book!). Wendy manages to be Neils soul mate and understand him like no other person can. Shes Neils backbone and tries to be his Savior, but obviously she can only try. Where as Eric provides the film with extra warmth and humanity. His scenes with Brian are probably my favorite as it shows just how much he cares about him, and also gives Brian that true friend he has always wanted and needed. Someone to make a connection with (until he meets Neil, who without, Brian would never have come to understand what happened to him). Overall I cant praise this film enough. Although there are a few disturbing scenes that have to be there (which some people might not be able to look behind and see the meaning of), it doesn't take away from the beauty of the script, film and acting. Now I need to go and buy that book!


While this movie is still fresh in my mind, I want to commend Joseph Gorden-Levitt for taking on a role few actors would dare to touch. I would have, but I haven't had the pleasure of meeting Gregg Araki - yet. I've faithfully followed Araki's career since TOTALLY F'ED UP and I've since felt he could make an important and profound film - if only given the opportunity and the budget. He finally has! 3RD ROCK is one of my all time favorite TV series, and I've since felt JGL had could prove himself as one of the all time great actors, if only the right script presented itself. This is it, guys! Keep up the good work. I can't wait to see Araki's next film OR JGL's next performance. If you guys were to break up, it would be like The Beatles or Zepp breaking up all over again - so don't do it!


A bizarrely satisfying masterpiece of a movie, with some of the best acting ever. The cinematography, the script, and all of the actors were just fantastic, but this movie runs so much deeper than that. It is truly capturing the spirit of the human psyche, and how our minds work. The tale of these two friends who have never met each other is both moving and disturbing, and the filming has so many layers to it. Subsquent viewings of the film only make it better, and it is overall just absolutely heartbreaking. Everything about this movie is just oozing with appeal, from its look to the characters to the performances that make it seem just so realistic. I loved every minute of this non-stop drama masterpiece.


This movie is a beautifully acted psychological thriller. The film describes some of the ways in which victims of pedophiles suffer. Another sad message is that victims of sexual abuse may be doomed to seek similar treatment over and over again for the rest of their lives.

I've loved Joseph Gordon Levitt since he played "Tommy" on Third Rock From the Sun and he's grown into a powerful actor. I wasn't familiar with Brady Corbet's work but he is equally moving as the young man trying to remember the sexual trauma he experienced as an eight-year old boy.

Elizabeth Shue and Elizabeth Long are both tragically perfect as the clueless mothers of these two boys.

Obviously, this movie is truly an expression of love for the writers and directors - for everyone involved. This story and its message are so important, and a cautionary tale for parents everywhere.


Brian Lackey (Corbet), a bookish, shortsighted teenager, is still troubled by the strange hole in his memories. The summer he was eight, five hours of his life disappeared without a trace. He has become convinced that he was abducted by aliens. An encounter with a fellow abductee in his search for an explanation leads him to Neil, now a cocksure hustler with one thing on his mind, and gradually the pieces of the puzzle come together. But Neil's frozen in time, back in that summer when he was 'special'; his sexuality warped, he is compulsively searching for that same feeling, without realizing that search will destroy him.

the snow-scene as it's written in the book: "I took Wendy's hand. Snowflakes clung to ours coats... "I Wish they where showing a movie...a film about our lives, everything that's happened so far. And we would be the only ones standing here, just you and me". With her free hands, she unhooked a speaker from its pole. She twiddled the dials and lifted into her ear. «Listen. I hear something. It's the voice of God» She laughed and I leaned to where she held the speaker, the side of my head brushing against its chilly ridges. The snow began tumbling faster in sharp diagonals darts.I closed my eyes and listened. Wendy gripped my fingers tighter. After a while I heard a whispering from deep within the speaker. It could have been something as explainable as Wendy paying a joke, or our gloves bristling together, or the wind that gusted the flakes around us. But I wanted the noise to be something else. "Yes, I told her, I hear him." The rest of the world had frozen and Wendy and I were all that remained. I brushed snow from her face. "I hear him".