Mjeteconer Just perfect...

UnowPriceless hyped garbage

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Bereamic Awesome Movie

merelyaninnuendo Kramer VS. KramerHow often do you watch a movie and fall into its world from the first frame till the end credits? Kramer VS. Kramer is one of those rare masterpiece that is innocent even though it raises some delicate questions about society. Dustin Hofmann holds our little finger and walks us through the movie all on his own to the other side of the road where Meryl Streep is waiting for us to mesmerize us. Kramer VS. Kramer is a fine example of the art that cinema is with its unpredictable and surprisingly beautiful script.

Benedito Dias Rodrigues l watched the first part of this movie in 1987 and turn off the TV after around 30 minutes...too much talking,in fact drama wasn't my favorite kind of movie at all...but now as collector l must to have this movie in my racks So l decided to watch it one more time and today the movie sounds me really fantastic...this kind of drama is always a heavy matters to put on screen mainly when the woman left the house having the kid behind,when the remorse mother appear asking the kid back the case end up in a court house a powerful drama indeed,however l think that Apocalypse Now is more superior than Kramer vs. Kramer and deserved won the Oscar but who cares...the movie is really good but l find it overrated even Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep having a great performance.

sol- Forced to take care of his young son when his wife walks out on him, a workaholic finds himself in a custody battle when his wife returns eighteen months later in this emotionally charged drama. Dustin Hoffman is excellent in the lead role with many remarkable moments throughout, mostly notably the way he slowly comes apart while making breakfast for his son for the first time. The film is shot with a number of superb subtle touches too, such as the camera every so slowly zooming in on Hoffman in the scene where he is fired. While many of the themes here are nothing new (juggling family and work; single parenting), the quality of acting from all concerned elevates the material. The best aspect of the film is probably how we are given a chance to hear the mother/wife's side of the story in the second half of the movie. While the movie is nowhere near as two-sided as it could have been, there is something touching in how the mother/wife is never turned into a villain - especially since her request to have her son back initially seems plain selfish. Meryl Streep is very good in the part too, turning what could have easily been a detestable character into a relatable human being. The conclusion here might not be particularly realistic, but with a sensational closing shot and memorable final dialogue exchange between the two leads, it is hard to resent the choice of ending.

sharky_55 Kramer vs. Kramer begins with the picking up of the ashes of an eight year marriage. We are left trying to assemble the broken pieces of the Kramer household in the period where we would be conventionally just being introduced and warming up to the characters. So it is a mystery, in a sense, working backwards - clues are laid out in front of us and we must try to decipher them and answer the question of why Joanna Kramer might want to walk out on her husband, but more importantly, her seven year old son. For a moment there is the suggestion that there may be a disability in play, but soon we realise that he is just another clumsy seven year old who wants ice cream instead of dinner. What Benton does here is use Joanna's absence as actual narrative. The wide swathes of the motherhood experience missing from the household tell us all that we need to know about her previous role. Billy is well-drilled; he knows exactly what brand of cereal and detergent is the best, has memorised where all the kitchen utensils are, and from rubbing of his mother's shoulders seems to be the better cook too. Ted knows none of this. He doesn't even know what grade his son is in. These early sequences of him struggling to reconcile his new duties as a father and handling a major account at his work are the easy, sentimental stuff that must inevitably occur when we are dealing with stories of parenthood. Yes, Billy may be a little brat at times, but he is also only seven, and Ted must re-learn this again and again. Until they are finally bonding, and must bide their time before it is ripped away from them. It is not so hard to get through this familiar material because Hoffman is such a natural at the role - the moment where he sees Billy wobbly take off on his bicycle and his face creases up the widest smile you have ever seen is so believable and such a relief because we too have been taken on this journey and we know the baggage that lies heavy in his heart. The early, chaotic french toast breakfast is later masterfully contrasted with another breakfast; again it is french toast, and this time they have mastered the routine, but there is a deafening silence because of what is to come, and they are trying to enjoy every last moment of it, but also trying to pretend like it isn't coming. Many have labelled this a court-room drama. I think this is the wrong tag. It comes with the assumptions that the dialogue comes thick and fast and there are pre-determined moments where we gasp and the lawyers strike dramatic poses and swap steely gazes. This is nothing as flashy and surface-level. The lawyers themselves are still snappy and ruthless. Joanna's in particular has completely rid himself of any heart and narrowed his sights on not only getting Billy back but also destroying all constructs that Ted's fatherhood might have erected. He repeatedly cuts off Margaret because he is not interested in the backstory but only getting his conviction soundbites that paint a much different story than what is really happening. No, the meat of the story is here, but it is not within the court system and the way it strips down everything to nothing but cold, hard facts and twists their intentions cruelly. As each side pleads their case both Joanna and Ted begin to realise that their battle is a fruitless one if Billy is to suffer for it, and start to turn back on their own arguments. The clear cuts and divides in the law are revealed to be not adequately equipped to handle such delicate and emotionally jumbled issues. If this wanted to fill seats it would have had young Billy himself take the stand and somehow magically see things clearer than the adults and repair the broken marriage. But he is only seven. Rarely can a film be so impartial. It asks nothing of its characters but complete honesty. Are their egos worth ripping apart the life of their young son? In the end, they make the right decision.