Here is yet another exploration of a criminal-minded writer by Lang in his noir era films. He really had something to say about the decadence of artists, which coincided with his period of being banished to the margins of the film industry.

Yes, it features something of a cop-out ending. Like "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt". Like "The Woman in the Window". Is Lang toying with us, like the cat that plays with the mouse before devouring it?

I would play this on a double bill with "Shock Corridor". Perhaps Fuller was aware of Lang's film in creating his own. I think Fuller's goes further and does more. Somehow it is also more cinematic. Lang's feels like a disinterested master carelessly spinning his wheels. It's a bad film but good as noir. Actually had the seeds to be a great film.

Is it better than "The 400 Blows"? I think it hits harder and packs more emotional power. Truffaut's film is something that belongs in the Louvre. You can marvel at its historical and aesthetic significance but it remains at more of a distance. It's a film du cinephile. Loach's film gets under your skin and into your heart. It lives with you. His is a film du humanite.

Did Bresson have this film in mind when he wrote, "In every art there is a diabolical principle which acts against it and tries to demolish it. An analogous principle is perhaps not altogether unfavourable to cinematography." The film is a miracle because every shot destroys what came before. Each cut completely rewrites the rules of the construction, regenerating spatial relations and every other causal juncture

A missing link to "Kill Bill". Beautiful blonde martial arts expert in a foreign land. Revenge plot to avenge a murdered sister. And the final fight, where the villain dies by having his eyes crushed with wooden poles. Tarantino has professed his love for Santiago and it is evident here. Maybe the most unique scene is when the two main characters make love by cutting each others clothes off with fighting knives.

What a beautiful presentation in this new DVD release. Did anyone notice the hilarious intertextual reference to "Citizen Kane"? Watch very closely and pay attention to Joseph Cotten...

I've been watching this two-parter more and more now and I realize I didn't appreciate it at first. I used to call it a "great flawed film". Now, it's just flat-out great. Storytelling brilliance, the epic scope, the perfect use of music. It's really a tour-de-force job of directing. The only flaw is some of the dialogue, but then I didn't appreciate the "movieness" of it -- of the whole project in fact.

Is this film so different from "Inglourious Basterds" in the method and style of its satirical comedy? I don't mean in the sum total of their respective artistic achievements. Both films play fast and loose with (historical) reality and fiction. Both employ awkward comedic slapstick. I'd play both on a double-bill because I think the films engage in an interesting dialogue with each other.

Seems to look back to "L'Avventura" while keeping pace with "Jules et Jim" and paving the way for "Bande a part". Maybe "Masculine Feminine" also owes a debt.

"Mothers" was just awarded the Grand Prize at the Belgrade International Film Festival (FEST).

"Shaft" was directed by Gordon Parks, not Gordon Parks Jr. (his son). Please correct this error.

I would much rather translate the title of this film as "Awakening of the Rats". It's more literal with regards to the original title and also sounds more proper in English.

The title of this film should be translated completely as "The Role of My Family in the World Revolution". Hopefully it can be corrected.

An open letter to Mr. Kiarostami. http://bit.ly/a5k0wP