A bit like Levinson does Demme circa Something Wild/Married to the Mob. Very consciously quirky and eccentric filmmaking. A celebration of bad taste and low-living in the early 90s.

An absolute treat for any fan of Woody. Very thorough and sophisticated documentary; the most comprehensive resource on the man's life and work to date.

90s goodness. Bridget Fonda's lovely.

Very good Woody. Penn's just brilliant — reminds of how funny he can be.

Enchanting!

There's a reason people don't often make films about fat losers.

Not a favourite of mine by any means, but still a very clever and funny film. Incredibly well-written material, handled with finesse by the ensemble cast.

If you'd like a well-written list of those criticisms, Ebert's done it: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19940218/REVIEWS/402180303/1023

This film has such a likable quality that any criticisms — of which I could make many — are irrelevant. Defining 90s film. Great cast. Clever, funny writing. Decent music. Direction is perfectly adequate. Say no more.

Very talented, and the best kind of actor — one who can work with any material, regardless of its quality, and play it to the best of their ability. Zahn epitomises what a character actor should be, and disputes the notion that acting isn't a worthwhile profession.

Unobjectionable and very enjoyable adaptation — arguably more so than Kubrick's classic effort — not that that really matters.

[Continued from below] ...The only assessment I can make is that it supports my inkling that Dennis Hopper is a brilliant idiot; right place, right time, full of integrity, charisma and raw talent, but somewhat lacking in refinement and rationality.

This is one of the first films I saw when I began to take films as more than just entertainment. I've seen it several times since, and — as it is one of those films that begs you to form an opinion — I still can't make my mind up about it. All I know is that it's special and that I enjoy it... [Read on above]

I don't believe in listing or ranking films. I believe that all films are more or less equal; that they all have qualities that will evoke emotion in the viewer, and that to declare one film better than another is a pointless endeavor. However, if I DID, this would be The Greatest Film of All Time.

With his films, Lynch works — very successfully, I might add — solely at establishing a whole and consistent aesthetic. He disregards plot and conventional film devices in favour of presenting rather abstract, but very well executed, ideas — themes, visions, scenes, situations, people, places — that work within and contribute towards this aesthetic. He aims to set a mood, and that's about it. The problem with this style of working — if you consider it a problem — is that his appeal is limited drastically. Unless his films appeal to your particular aesthetic sense, you'll most likely find yourself shrugging your shoulders, wondering what the big deal is. Whereas most films have at least one quality that every viewer can connect to, Lynch's films lack the breadth and depth.

No words. Just awe. Malick commandeers the movie medium to explore themes — Earth's formation, science and its relation to the human condition, as well as family, childhood, religion, the afterlife and general agnostic reflection. Lofty and pretentious, perhaps, but only if you let it be. Let your guard down, forget judgement and allow yourself to absorb what's on the screen. The Tree of Life isn't an intellectual film. It doesn't lecture you on its themes, but merely presents them on a basic and human level, allowing you to ponder along with it.

Not a perfect film by any means, but such a great product of its time. Beautiful acting, beautiful actors. Music, photography, wardrobe, all wonderful. The style is quirky and unconventional, albeit in a very self-conscious and slightly naive manner — all part of the joy. Just one more comment: River Phoenix.

I don't know what this says about my taste, but I really loved this film. One of those viewings that stays with you for days afterwards. Inspiring, if slightly hackneyed, story supported by a rich and thorough style and aesthetic backdrop — i.e. everything works because it's all been considered and thought through.

Pothead. Shame.

Busta Rhymes, talented actor. Seriously.

Re-watched last night. It's actually very good. Like most of Mazursky's films, it lacks focus and a broad appeal (the latter not necessarily a bad thing), but if you're thinking about seeing it, do so. You won't be disappointed.

Richard Edson!

It's decent enough. Quit your whining.

Smart, smart, smart.

A really enjoyable film. The type where everyone involved is doing it for no other reason than to make something good.

'Nother time, perhaps!

I'm a big Woody fan, but I'm also very critical of his films. I though this was great.

Yes, I actually watched this. Seriously, DO NOT BOTHER.

Do I have to have seen Casablanca to appreciate this?

Should have called this one Blowup instead. What an ending!