Protraph Lack of good storyline.

Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

Lucia Ayala It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

clanciai This is a fascinating film which you'll have to watch very carefully, since every detail, especially in the conversations, is important and vital to the very complex sieve of intrigue and amazing diversions into constantly deeper waters of metaphysics, relationships and complications. Formally it is an ordinary inquisition piece with a scoundrel of an inquisitor trying to come to terms with an impossible reality without succeeding, of course, while Gabriel Byrne is the scapegoat for investigating the truth and ending up with amazing findings, intolerable for their humanity and revelations of love. But the film is much more than just this meaningless investigation into an endless labyrinth of unfathomable heart secrets of humanity. The famous novel of the 20s by Thornton Wilder (sadly unknown and forgotten today) has been filmed three times, but Mary McGuckian from Nothern Ireland has chosen to take a very personal view and simply concentrated on making a masterpiece of beauty. Many can't follow the intricate turns and windings of this web of complications, but it isn't necessary to grasp it all. The point is the love and the beauty, overwhelmingly enhanced and embellished by Lalo Schifrin from Buenos Aires in his finest score of subtle sensitivity. This is a masterpiece of beauty of Mary McGuckian's and Lalo Schifrin's, and there can be no doubt about it, no matter how many get lost on the way in trying vainly to follow the details in this inextricable enigma of interwoven human destinies. This is definitely a film to see over and over again to discover new aspects and hidden clues to the mystery of love, life and death.It gives interesting associations, though, in its labyrinthine architecture to Powell/Pressburger's "A Canterbury Tale", another winding system of improvised labyrinths, and in character to Jane Campion's "The Piano" from New Zealand, another marvel of beauty and mystery made the more fascinating and effective by its amazing music.It was all filmed in southern Spain, but its South American character is genuine. The actors are all excellent, perhaps most of all Kathy Bates as the Marquesa, seconded especially by Pilar Lopez De Ayala and Gabriel Byrne as the honest doubter. Another clue to its understanding is its pictorial beauty throughout. In the beginning of the film there is a key scene, when the Marquesa visits a painting by Velazquez, from which she miraculously retrieves a beautiful golden necklace in the intention to offer it to her daughter. It's the one detail in the film which is surrealistic, but it opens the film to its marvel of pictorial beauty - the whole film is like paintings by Velazquez. In America the film was massacred since no one could understand it, especially not American critics, since this is a very European and most of all Spanish film in character. If you know anything about Spanish painting, you'll understand and relish the film. Another aspect is its metaphysical character, which you can't understand if you don't read the book. It's short of only 200 pages but extremely concentrated. You must wonder why brother Juniper is prosecuted by the inquisition for having just so carefully documented the fates of the five casualties, and the obvious reason is this: what united these people was only love, they were penitents for nothing but undeserved feelings of guilt, one of them being even a small child, and they were all looking forward to a bright future of a better and nobler life, especially the Marquesa, who had only loved and that too well; while the about 150 survivors, who had to follow the caravan crossing the river down in the gorge and therefore did not cross the footbridge, were in overwhelming magnitude less deserving of life. The inquisition found the insinuation that this could be a case of divine injustice unacceptably blasphemous , and therefore burned the book and its author. Well, the book and the author lives the more for that. Unhesitatingly 10 score.

lejane-1 I thought the movie was brilliant. I got it right from the word go - it was outstanding in how they brought the message of whether God has a hand in everything or whether our own actions, not only on our behalf but in our reactions towards other people and free will set things in motion that then lead to tragedy (and if we change in our behaviour, could we save or is it destiny and God's Will that overrides whatever we do?)I think it helps to be Catholic with a keen interest in Church history. I can understand that otherwise one would perhaps struggle and end up playing a bit of catch up whilst watching the movie and that could lead to losing one or two important items of information. A better explanation in the beginning in some form would've helped I think.The actors were brilliant. Kathy Bates irritated me in just the right amount and yet one felt compassion for her. Harvey Keitel outstanding and Robert de Niro played the consummate political leading clergyman perfectly. Geraldine Chaplin hit a perfect note.As for the actual death scene, even though I knew how was going to die, it was still an immensely poignant moment and captured just everything perfectly. Gabriel Byrne's lilted narrative was just right. No judgement, nothing of that sort, but just a note of sadness. He wasn't burnt at the stake because he queried, he was burnt because he had found out too much (that's a personal opinion).I am out to find the book soonest.

raymond-15 The story centres around an event that took place in Peru when five people crossing a rope bridge fell to their death. The question then arose.......Was it a chance happening OR was it an act of God? Brother Juniper a man of the cloth attacks the problem in a factual way by door knocking the friends and relatives of the victims and compiling a biography of each individual in the hope that all five may have something in common. When the resultant volume fell into the hands of the Spanish Inquisition, Brother Juniper was found guilty of heresy and subsequently burnt at the stake with all his books.Early in the story we see the swinging bridge high up above a treacherous looking ravine. It is quite ominous and frightening. I for one would never dare to cross it.Thornton Wilder's story of the five victims who for various reasons were in the party ready for the crossing is really heavy going. I watched the DVD a second time for a better understanding, but with no English sub-titles I missed a lot of the dialogue. Basically the film covers the cross examination of Brother Juniper's activities with flashbacks showing details of the lives of the victims. I am not sure if it was the script or the poor editing but I got terribly confused with the characters at times. Robert de Niro as the Catholic Archbishop was unrelentless in his pursuit of the confiscation of the observations recorded by Brother Juniper. The Church he said was built on steadfast faith on which Brother Juniper seemed to cast doubt and should therefore die..Costuming and sets were excellent. I found the linking of the scenes somewhat haphazard and consequently difficult to follow. The final scene in which the frayed ropes of the bridge finally give way is utterly terrifying as we watch the travelers drop to their death in the waters at the base of the ravine. We knew it was about to happen as the tight ropes begin to split and open but at what precise moment the bridge will snap keeps us on the edge of our seat. . I give an extra mark for this scene.Summing up, a good subject but needs to be retold in a more expert manner.

dave-2959 Breathtakingly stultifying. I'm amazed the Principals could even get through the script reading. How do they decide to do such horribly boring movies? Harvey Keitel, what were you thinking ? Possibly a chick film, in which case my testosterone level has been decreased 10% for sitting through the first hour of this abysmal ego romp. Find this writer and drop him/her into the same chasm as the bridge fell into. How does one create 10 lines of claptrap to communicate how completely awful a film such as this might be? Yet try I must, to warn all my brothers that this movie can only be gotten through if you 1) are taking Estrogen therapy 2) have been de-nutted, 3) Are not even minimally heterosexual, 4)Are a big Kathy Bates fan. There .. 10 lines.