Laikals The greatest movie ever made..!

ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

mraculeated The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Orla Zuniga It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

Dusan Petrovic The world is round so no matter where you go you are always in the center of it. This is one of the best Jim Jarmush movies. Great music, great photography, great acting, it's all good. It's magic." Why would I drive if I could be driven?" This is the first thing I think about it whenever I see this movie. It always remindes me on my country, my childhood and place I belong to. For the ones who didn't know, the really story about Christopher Marlow, the Devil as himself A.K.A Men in White is from the one of Jim Jarmusch movies. On the bottom of, line I like cab driving. Sincerelly, yours Dushan Petrovic from Belgrade, Serbia

Christopher Culver NIGHT ON EARTH (1991), the fourth film by American auteur Jim Jarmusch, is a series of vignettes centered around taxi journeys in the US and Europe over a single winter night. There is no overarching plot, but rather each segment is a study in interaction between the driver and his fare.In Los Angeles, Winona Ryder is a 16-year-old tomboy taxi driver and Gena Rowland is a Hollywood casting agent. In New York, Armin Mueller-Stahl is an immigrant from East Germany who gets a crash course on American culture after he takes Giancarlo Esposito and Rosie Perez to Brooklyn. Crossing the Atlantic, we first go to Paris where Isaac de Bankole, an Ivorian immigrant who faces the challenge of racism daily, picks up blind woman Béatrice Dalle who could care less what colour his skin is.The last two segments are less about class or race and more humorous and individual. In Rome, Roberto Benigni finds an opportunity to confess a long list of sins after he picks up priest Paolo Bonacelli. This is a hilarious scene, the most extreme part of the film. In Helsinki, Matti Pellonpää brings three drunks home (Kari Väänänen, Sakari Kuosmanen, and Tomi Salmela), but after they bemoan their misfortune, he tells them what real suffering is.NIGHT ON EARTH continues the characteristic choice of scenery that Jarmusch offered in his films to date. When so much cinema depicts the US as so many ritzy places and historical landmarks, Jarmusch instead offers vacant lots, dilapidated buildings, and businesses that have long since gone out of business. In Paris, Rome, and Helsinki he also offers nondescript, industrial or residential areas, quite deserted because it is the dead of night.This isn't a flawless film. The opening bit with Winona Ryder feels overacted. The Paris segment is nothing but clichés about how the blind might not see, but their other senses are more powerful than the sighted. The New York and Helsinki segments are homages to Jarmusch's peers Spike Lee and Aki Kaurismaki respectively, using their settings and borrowing some of their actors. While the New York scene has Jarmusch's characteristic humour, Jarmusch's style is almost completely effaced in the Helsinki scene and one could believe he's watching a Kaurismaki film.Nonetheless, this is a very enjoyable film. Virtually all audiences will enjoy Benigni's wacky comedy, and I've come to appreciate Matti Pellonpää's acting even more. I've seen NIGHT ON EARTH several times, and I've always found it to have re-watch value.

Ivan Veno Ivankovic Few directors enjoy the cult status that Jarmusch does. Sadly, he is praised undeservedly, this film is not ingenious. So why do people praise him so much? The answer may appear at the conclusion of this review.The film's plot revolves around five taxi rides around the world, at night. They take place in Los Angeles, New York, Paris, Rome and Helsinki.The way the movie is filmed is unambitious, the camera is placed in the taxi, the driver in the front seat (to the right of the screen), the passenger in the back seat (to the left of the screen). Technically (camera placement, cinematography, lighting etc) Jarmusch doesn't offer us anything new, so people shouldn't praise him for this.The worst part about this movie is the plot. Jarmusch shows us long and boring monologues, uninteresting dialogue and a very weak plot. This is why no studio will ever finance him. Oh, but he's proud of that, isn't he? The way people talk, and what they say is very boring. Even if you have a great actor playing the part, and saying the lines in a very interesting way, this doesn't make you interested. Imagine Morgan Freeman, or David Letterman saying "We're out of milk". Even if they do say it in a way which is most accurately described as awesome, you're still not interested. The great Kurosawa said "Though a mediocre director can sometimes make a passable film out of a good script, even an excellent director can never make a good film out of a bad script". Jarmusch wrote this script in eight days. Jarmusch wrote a very bad script. You can say, "but this is how people talk in real life". If we were more entertained by real life than by movies, the movie industry would cease to exist. The reason we watch movies is to see something that we don't see everyday. Showing me something "real", something I can see everyday bores me. He isn't just showing people the way they talk in real life, he is showing us real life. He might as well have turned the camera on in a cab, and made a movie out of it. Writing a script in eight days is not impressive, it's insulting, he didn't put enough effort into it and it ends up sucking. If you are making a movie, put more effort into the script, because people watch movies. People deserve better, especially if they are paying to see the movie. Nothing happens in this movie, I'm serious, it's just people talking in a cab! That's it, nothing more! Jarmusch has said that he would rather make a movie about a man walking his dog, than a movie about the emperor of China. Does he LOVE emptiness in a movie? Does he LOVE a movie that has no story, or a very weak one? He is the biggest enemy of all fiction, he hates a good story, and he loves a bad one. He loves boring things. The most interesting thing about Jarmusch is his hair. The script is the major fault in this movie, because of the bad script the movie is terrible.The film has some good acting, I guess. Nothing memorable, though. Roberto Benigni is a great actor and director, see "A beautiful Life". Winona Rider is also respectable. The person who plays the Norwegian cab driver is very good, and his monologue, I will admit, is well written. It's not the imagery we see in Bergman's "Persona", a film which contains the single best monologue in history, but it's good. Jarmusch probably worked a whole day on it.The music in the film is not consistent with the tone. People talking in a cab at night is not Jazz. It's not The Blues. It's just people talking in a cab. Jarmusch put it in, probably because he likes Jazz, that's it.Why people like him still alludes me, but I'll give it a shot. It's because they don't want to like what everybody else likes. They want to be unique. They want to see independent film making, they probably also like Indy rock. It's OK to like something, but to wrongly preach about how great it is, when it's really just boring, and act as if you are better than people who don't like this film for a reason, that's wrong. I don't like this film for the reasons above, why you like it, I don't know. Maybe I'm just too stupid to get Jarmusch.

Robert Miller I can't believe that IMDb watchers rated this a 7.7 stars, they must've been high on some kind of serious drugs or something! Five pointless stories about five foreign cabdrivers. This film makes you think that something is going to happen around the next turn but nothing does, no cool twists or anything funny just boring stories that made my girlfriend fall asleep. The first two stories were better than the last three. The boring story with Winona Ryder was probably the best, this was one of her first films and must not have read the script very well. She must have needed some money real bad to decide to do this horrible movie. Get ready to put your ear plugs in when you see Rosie Perez coming with her annoying shrieking voice of darkness! This scene was really annoying even the drunks in the ghetto wanted to tell her to shut up. I was hoping that each story might have some type of twist coming into the plot, but they never did and I was very surprised I watched the last two stories, they just got worse as they went along. The last three of them are even captioned, you actually have to take the extra energy to read the words, so really!!! – Don't bother with this movie, it really sucked. Absolutely pointless, none of them had any substance.