Ellen-Burstyn Movie Reviews

I saw this film in a theatrical release and have never forgotten its power. This film is a story within a story, showing the effects of jealousy and rage taken to extremes. Melina Mecuri is an actress preparing a production of Medea and is working with a former lover who rejected her for another woman. As research for her role, she goes to visit in prison a woman (played marvelously by Ellen Bursten) who has actually killed her children in a revengeful, jealous rage against her unfaithful Greek husband. Her ordinariness, complete absence of regret and the power of her rage are a facinating combination. Melina, along with ourselves, becomes a horrified witness (in flashbacks) to the children's murder. The emotions evolked were so powerful that I and my companions were literally stunned speechless by this film.

I saw "Dream of Passion" on its original release and have never forgotten the riveting and disturbing impressions it made upon me, nor the memorable performances of both Ellen Burstyn and Melina Mercouri as the murderess and the actress. The theme of appalling revenge for a husband's betrayal is as timeless as the beautiful Greek settings in which it is photographed, and creates a gripping tension. An unusual and powerfully acted film, which unfortunately I have never been able to watch again as I have not found it re-released and it appears to be unavailable except in US /Canadian format. I would be delighted if anyone has any ideas on how I could watch it here in Australia! Are there any gizmos which could make it work on my Aussie video player & telly?

Jules Dassin's brilliant vision of actress [and spouse] Melina Mercouri's journey to theatrical Hell and Back is a rarely seen masterpiece.

Premise? Mercouri is about to embark on a production of MEDEA and uses incarcerated Burstyn [American wife/Greek Husband] as inspiration. Spontaneous improvised moments - especially the conversation about Brando and the "real" [possibly autobiographical] moments from "Last Tango in Paris".

Memorable moments between the two women!

Recommended? Pasolini's classic version of "MEDEA" with Callas - also a rare find!

[Now, what happened to "PHAEDRA" ? With Melina Mercouri, Anthony Perkins and Raf Vallone - a brilliant modern adaptation, by Jules Dassin].

This movie lacks the sophistication of the Hollywood blockbusters. However, the message, the script and the acting are so powerful you won't notice after the first 20 minutes.

This film should have made Detmers a star after her role in "Devil in the Flesh"....It is a superior film based on a true story about a hero whose values were stronger than her own survival...It is a film all should see for the history and most of all for Detmers...a talent who Hollywood did not know what to do with, but lucky for us had two films that showed us her talents.

NOW it IS that kind of work and more.

Dying Author John Gielgud reflects with guilt on his long life, which includes the suicide of his wife [Elaine Stritch]as welll as other moments of regret.

NOT a depressing work, it's a thoughtful moving moody study of this man and his family. It's a sad work, that has to be visited and revisited, encompassing a grand score by Miklos Rosa, and those unique Resnais touches [the frozen sea in frame, but we hear waves crashing!] - when you recall with specific focus a moment [real and animated]but its surrounded by an immobile, frozen landscape [like "Last Year at Marienbad" an earlier and more satisfying work].

The rest of the ensemble? Ellen Burstyn, Dirk Bogarde [always spectacular, always taking risks] and David Warner [the werewolf?].

Elegant and thought-provoking this work deserves a proper DVD restoration.

Also see "Hiroshima, Mon Amour" - excellent companion.

This is, to my mind, one of the four or five best films of the seventies, and one that continues to give pleasure and inspiration. It's a shame that it isn't better known in the US, and scandalous that it hasn't been issued on DVD.

An oldie but goodie (1969). This film has been one of my favorites since presenting it via a film society 22 years ago. That audience seemed to enjoy it as well.

This unique film possesses some of the most alive English language dialogue to ever hit the screen. Incorporated within the stream of consciousness visuals of master French director Alain Resnais (his first work in English), this film, written by playwright David Mercer, delivers the audience into the mind of a dying and somewhat bitter author (Sir John Gielgud) as he attempts to write one last work of fiction through a painful and sleepless night of rectal pain, albeit increasingly under the influence of an alcoholic beverage. As his minds clouds, his script becomes confused, often with comedic effect.

While sad, bitter sweet, moving and often serious, this film possesses wonderful humor. The recurring images of the "famous footballer" (David Warner), Ellen Burstyn's slicing of a phallic-shaped vegetable while accusing her husband of infidelity and the delivery of Dirk Bogard's pithy lines all conspire to amuse even the most jaded moviegoer. If you don't like a certain scene, be patient, the director/author will take another whack at it - usually with a subtle visual twist.

This is one film worth watching more than once. In fact, you will want to watch it more than once to see what you missed previously.

This masterwork seriously deserves to be re-released as a DVD.

How to Make an American Quilt is a nice comfortable movie, and unlike so many other films belonging to the 'coming of age' genre, it doesn't leave the viewer feeling emotionally drained. It is also unusual in that it attempts to breach the generation divide in its appeal; however its success in this respect is debatable.

Finn is 26 and, hoping for some peace and quiet in which to complete her Master's thesis, she heads for her great-aunt's house in small-town Grasse, California. She also needs time to mull over a marriage proposal from her boyfriend. This is an entrance cue for a smoulderingly handsome strawberry farmer (in an unnecessary plot complication) to hinder Finn's contemplations.

Great-aunt Glady-Joe lives with her sister, Hy, and their constant bickering is portrayed with sensitivity and humour by Anne Bancroft and Ellen Burstyn. The two sisters belong to a quilting group, who are in the process of creating Finn's wedding quilt - thematically titled 'where love resides'. This evokes something different for each of the women, all of whom - in artificially contrived tete-a-tetes - explain to Finn the story behind their contributions to the quilt. The viewer is transported to a time when these elderly women were young, and through them we (along with Finn) learn that times may change, but affairs of the heart will always be unpredictable.

These dalliances in the past are refreshingly piquant; unfortunately this is countered by the film's occasional heavy-handedness. The symbolic crow that leads the women to their true love has all the subtlety of a flashing neon sign. Ultimately however, even if it does perhaps tie up the loose ends too thoroughly, the film will leave the viewer pleasantly satisfied.

I saw the movie on TV and it is just really refreshing from most of the movies nowadays. It's one of the movies that posts a bunch of questions up in the air and tells the answers at the end. I think it's about this girl college student play by Ryder who isn't sure about what she's going to do about her love. And she is writing this paper on her aunts, parents, basically the people in the quilt group. And I guess she finds the answer after she heard all the experiences from her quilting friends. It's something about commiting to love, gradual learning of life. I like the theme. I read the book too and it's pretty good too but the good thing of the movie is that it organzied the novel into a story, and what a girl learned from it. THe book is all scattered and seperated into short stories of each of the ladies in the quilt club, but it lets the readers analysis and think about it all on your own. They are both good.

Starting with the title, which is terrific, I also liked the great cast of actors who were chosen for the film. The story begins when Finn (Winona Ryder) comes to spend the summer with her grandmother (Ellen Burstyn) and her aunt (Anne Bancroft) at a grand old house in California. Finn is a graduate student who wants to spend the summer working on her thesis. She also needs a break from her boyfriend who wants to marry her. She's very indecisive about everything in her life, and I honestly found her part to be a little boring. The best parts of the story are about the friends that her grandmother and aunt share and their involvement in a quilting circle. The quilting ladies are all quite different and through flashbacks we're given a glimpse of them as young women and the love or lack of love in their lives. Jean Simmons plays one of the women, and I was delighted to see her acting again. I loved the scenes where the quilters, are working around a table in the lovely old house. The set designs were beautiful and perfect for the story.

At a certain point in the film, we come to find out that the theme of the quilt is "where love resides." Every quilter is making a block from her own experience in life. Finn also learns that the quilt is her wedding gift.

HOW TO MAKE AN AMERICAN QUILT is an enjoyable movie. I think that the individual stories could have been a little more informative, but all things considered it's a wonderful movie and worth seeing.

I'm sorry but I did not like this movie. It had some flaws. The
actors were good but the story was not told very well. I wouldn't recomend this movie.

Judging by the amount of reviews written here,obviously this isn't a popular film. But just in case someone actually looks up this movie,I have to let you know this is a wonderful,silly,amusing comedy. Curtis and Reynolds are perfect on-screen together. Both deliver fun performances,as does Pat Boone. Here's a good movie to watch when your a little down,and in need of a laugh. It will definitely bring a smile on your face. A little personal note:A remake followed this film some 20 years later Blake Edward's "Switch". But between the two I prefer this one.

A playboy is shot by a jealous husband after he is caught in the middle of an affair with the man's wife. Later he comes back as Debbie Reynolds, possibly as God's punishment to him for the way he spent his life using women for his own pleasure, or mabey as a way of seeing if being a woman can teach him how to be a better human being, or maybe both. It's a saddly undiscovered comedy that hopefully more people will get to see and enjoy, now that it's been rereleased on video. I also happened to find the script for the play that this movie is based on. (There was a copy of the play write in the public library.) The play is very, very short, so of course the movie adds much more to the story. I was a little disapointed by the ending of the movie, however. (I liked the ending of the play much better.) The movie is still well worth seeing, however, and if you are lucky enough to find the play script, it is well worth reading.

She'd love us to forget this film, I'm sure. Script problems abound... A lot of not so interesting moments.

it's romantic and sad but i didn't even feel like crying until the very end. you don't get very invested in the movie, because there is a lack of really good material, i think. campbell scott seems like an intense actor and did well in this role, but julia roberts' character left me confused. overall, it's very watchable, but it's not some beautiful, sentimental love story that will send you running for the kleenex.

What got me into this movie was actually the theme "I'll Never Leave You" written by Kenny G and James Newton Howard. The beautiful yet melancholy melody delineates a heart-breaking story about a wealthy young lukemia patient, Victor's (Campbell Scott) final stage of life with a surrogate nurse Hillary (Julia Roberts).

Recognized of his soon demise, Victor makes the most out of limited lifetime through teaching art and making himself happy. Woven with nurse Hillary, Victor realizes being strong and living life to the full is what really matters. The movie is filled with touching life struggle battling the disease, and also bittersweet conversations among the tormented couple.

Scenes and music are both incredible and well-matched. It will touch your soul and prompt you re-evaluate your own life.

She'd love us to forget this film, I'm sure. Script problems abound... A lot of not so interesting moments.

it's romantic and sad but i didn't even feel like crying until the very end. you don't get very invested in the movie, because there is a lack of really good material, i think. campbell scott seems like an intense actor and did well in this role, but julia roberts' character left me confused. overall, it's very watchable, but it's not some beautiful, sentimental love story that will send you running for the kleenex.

What got me into this movie was actually the theme "I'll Never Leave You" written by Kenny G and James Newton Howard. The beautiful yet melancholy melody delineates a heart-breaking story about a wealthy young lukemia patient, Victor's (Campbell Scott) final stage of life with a surrogate nurse Hillary (Julia Roberts).

Recognized of his soon demise, Victor makes the most out of limited lifetime through teaching art and making himself happy. Woven with nurse Hillary, Victor realizes being strong and living life to the full is what really matters. The movie is filled with touching life struggle battling the disease, and also bittersweet conversations among the tormented couple.

Scenes and music are both incredible and well-matched. It will touch your soul and prompt you re-evaluate your own life.

DECEIVER is an apt name for this movie. It has pretensions to a twisted detective procedural; pursuit of a warped-genius murderer (a la Hannibal Lector);and perhaps a demonic-vengeance thriller like "Angel Heart" or "The Fallen". It is merely twisted. The film, in fact, is a deliberate exercise in psychological pornography. Its principal character is portrayed as a sado-masochist who revels in acts of cruelty who effortlessly descends into a self-induced state of oblivion untrammeled by conscience or guilt. Tim Roth plays this demonic creature with subdued insolence and relish as he practices his solipsistic acts of malice on his bewildered high-society parents, high-priced call girls and the detectives attempting to indict him for a brutal murder. The film is a trip to Hell without the fascination such "pilgrimages" sometimes afford. The movie's emotional exploitation is never particularly clever, nor jolting and the manipulative machinations of Roth ( especially The Lie Detector sequences) are manifestly transparent and require little intelligence to dismiss them as trite and self-indulgent. If it were not for the "accomplished" acting of the principals in this movie its quality as a piece of unredeemable dreck would be instantly self-evident. Sometimes a viewer simply has to admit he has been "had". DECEIVER is the title of this noxious movie. The viewer is, in my estimate, THE DECEIVED...

Deciever aka Liar is caught in a real Catch22. On the one hand it wants to play mind games, to prove how opaque our first impressions really are. On the other it wants to be a drama about the moral impotence and bottled up rage of men. We don't know enough about the cop Braxton(Chris Penn) or his partner Kennisaw(Michael Rooker) to care about either their gambling or marital problems resprectively.

The opacity ofcourse is deliberate. If you want twists and turns then you must have mysterious characters doing inexplicable things. Well there goes the drama. The lack of character development allows the film-makers to do complete 180s with the plot, but any resulting suspense is academic with none of the viceral impact of say Se7en.

Credibility is a vital element when it comes to thrillers. Even when they're set in space we have to believe that the film-makers know as much as we do, that they are on the same ride as we are. But in Liar the Pate brother cheat, they give us flashbacks that are meant specifically for the audience. I believe they did this to avoid the supposed monotony of the one room setting, but the flashbacks all but destroy the film. If they can see beyond the characters' lies, it means that Liar is nothing more then manipulative mental masterbation where they provide the audience with red herrings to a solution they already know. As a frame of reference lets use Roman Polanski's underrated 1994 film Death & The Maiden. That film was set in a single location and used no flashbacks, but its characters were so well written and acted that it generated more genuine suspense in a single scene then Liar does in its entire running time. Another film, 1995's masterful The Usual Suspects justified the use of flashbacks by having a character tell a story and then let the director realise his story visually.

Did I even mention the film's laughable tendancy to treat Epilepsy as if it were the demon possessing Linda Blair in The Exorcist.

Its a shame really because the film is technically remarkable(lots of shadows, darkness and gold light). It also waists the brilliant Tim Roth, who as the rich, bitter, manipulative and epileptic suspect James Walter Wayland gives a preverse and powerful performance. Had the film been as clear eyed and sharp as Roth's performance we might have really had something here. Considering that Liar is ultimately about manipulation, it might be cleverly ironic that its authors would lie to and manipulate the audience. It would be cleverly ironic if weren't so incredibly frustrating.

The cool thing about watching movies constantly is that you see so many bad ones that occasionally a movie as slick as this plays out. The cast is top notch, as is the directing by the Pate brothers, whose other credits include "The Grave" and the short lived but cool TV show "GvsE". Plenty of twists and turns abound in this movie that centers around Roth(in one of his best performances) taking a lie ditector test from two shady cops(Rooker and Penn) to find out if he is a murderer. A film that relies on character development and suprises that pays off in the end with something to think about, this is a good one. It would be nice to see on DVD but is not yet released on that format.

Deciever aka Liar is caught in a real Catch22. On the one hand it wants to play mind games, to prove how opaque our first impressions really are. On the other it wants to be a drama about the moral impotence and bottled up rage of men. We don't know enough about the cop Braxton(Chris Penn) or his partner Kennisaw(Michael Rooker) to care about either their gambling or marital problems resprectively.

The opacity ofcourse is deliberate. If you want twists and turns then you must have mysterious characters doing inexplicable things. Well there goes the drama. The lack of character development allows the film-makers to do complete 180s with the plot, but any resulting suspense is academic with none of the viceral impact of say Se7en.

Credibility is a vital element when it comes to thrillers. Even when they're set in space we have to believe that the film-makers know as much as we do, that they are on the same ride as we are. But in Liar the Pate brother cheat, they give us flashbacks that are meant specifically for the audience. I believe they did this to avoid the supposed monotony of the one room setting, but the flashbacks all but destroy the film. If they can see beyond the characters' lies, it means that Liar is nothing more then manipulative mental masterbation where they provide the audience with red herrings to a solution they already know. As a frame of reference lets use Roman Polanski's underrated 1994 film Death & The Maiden. That film was set in a single location and used no flashbacks, but its characters were so well written and acted that it generated more genuine suspense in a single scene then Liar does in its entire running time. Another film, 1995's masterful The Usual Suspects justified the use of flashbacks by having a character tell a story and then let the director realise his story visually.

Did I even mention the film's laughable tendancy to treat Epilepsy as if it were the demon possessing Linda Blair in The Exorcist.

Its a shame really because the film is technically remarkable(lots of shadows, darkness and gold light). It also waists the brilliant Tim Roth, who as the rich, bitter, manipulative and epileptic suspect James Walter Wayland gives a preverse and powerful performance. Had the film been as clear eyed and sharp as Roth's performance we might have really had something here. Considering that Liar is ultimately about manipulation, it might be cleverly ironic that its authors would lie to and manipulate the audience. It would be cleverly ironic if weren't so incredibly frustrating.

(by the way, just in case your not sure, Lynchian means like something David Lynch would Direct.) I have heard many people bag this movie, saying it doesn't make sence and it's too hard to follow. So I was glad to see these other reveiwers who felt as i did about this very unique movie. Tim Roth does his Best acting since Reservoir dogs in this rivorting thriller. I won't say anything about plot because its all to hard to put in words, but i will say this. Anyone who likes it, see the film "LOST HIGHWAY".

The cool thing about watching movies constantly is that you see so many bad ones that occasionally a movie as slick as this plays out. The cast is top notch, as is the directing by the Pate brothers, whose other credits include "The Grave" and the short lived but cool TV show "GvsE". Plenty of twists and turns abound in this movie that centers around Roth(in one of his best performances) taking a lie ditector test from two shady cops(Rooker and Penn) to find out if he is a murderer. A film that relies on character development and suprises that pays off in the end with something to think about, this is a good one. It would be nice to see on DVD but is not yet released on that format.

This movie caused the tears to pour down my face. The reason for this display of emotion was the fact that I was laughing incredibly hard. Plus, my neighbour had just wet her pants, laughing right along with me. It is sappy, sentimental, to the point of being nauseating. Uuuuurgh. I'd better go see if my neighbour's alright, I think she just fell of the couch.
Yes, I'm a teenager. Did you guess?

Except for the terrible cover and a killer of a title, this is an excellent movie. But it's not for everyone. If you like action, explosions, car chases, etc., this is NOT the movie for you.

The death of her father has put a 5-year-old girl into such shock that she refers to herself in the third person. She believes her father doesn't come home because she has done something bad and he won't forgive her. (The portrayal of this child by the child actress is nothing short of amazing.) How she is cured and the kindness shown to her, not just by those around her and by a distant family, but by the public at large is one of the most moving sequences on film. If you're not into human kindness or refuse to believe it exists, stay away from this film. But if you believe there's still hope, this movie will show you, you're right.

I thought that this film was very heartwarming. A young girl loses her father when she is four years old. Her mother obviously distraught was left to care for her alone, with the help of her mother and some friends. The little girl loved mermaids. Because the little girl didnt understand where her father had gone, her grandmother told her that she could write a letter to him, which they attached to a balloon. the balloon floated away and landed by a lake known as Mermaid lake in Mermaid City. A hunter found the letter and took it home, showed it to his family and decided to write back. The little girl recieved the letter later on and went to visit this family. They became firm friends. Meanwhile the mother became quite close to an old friend, whihc may have turned into a romance.
Overall i loved this film it was very sad but had a nice ending and was based on a true story.