ThiefHott Too much of everything

Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Lucybespro It is a performances centric movie

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

himanshutri The story depicts a lady's dealing with grief of her husband's sudden demise. How a lady makes many efforts to come to terms with the reality. A story told with honesty and sincerity and without any judgement.The brilliance of both the direction and the acting is seen in its simplicity. Many intense montages are shown with no suggestions (no exaggerated expressions and lilts in the background musical score). The director leaves that to be felt by the audience directly. That respect given to the audience is uncommon in today's mainstream Hindi cinema.The portrayal of grief and despair is intense and direct. The storyteller offers no balm that doesn't exist. How a store starts and ends is of course a raconteur's choice, yet their effort to do so non-judgementally is authentic-and original.The movie plot develops in the backdrop of Solidarity movement in Poland. The political background is delicately woven which enriches-and doesn't disturb-story's progress.Watch the movie in a positive frame of mind to appreciate the finnesse of the story.So many great stuff to absorb and reflect beyond Hindi and English literature and cinema.

Lee Eisenberg We might call Krzysztof Kieslowski's "Bez konca" ("No End" in English) a Polish predecessor to "Ghost", but that doesn't do it justice. This movie emphasizes the woman and how she tries to take up her late husband's task under difficult circumstances. Set in 1982, when Poland was under martial law and the Soviet-backed government was persecuting the Solidarity labor movement, it focuses on Urszula Zyro (Grazyna Szapolowska). Her lawyer husband Antek dies and she has to find a replacement for him in a case. But his spirit remains to watch over her and their son.This was a bold movie for its time. I don't know whether or not Poland had eased up on its persecution of Solidarity by the time that it got released (it was a sad irony that in the 21st century, long rid of Soviet domination, Poland assisted in the extraordinary rendition program). I suspect that this was one of the first Polish movies to feature a sex scene, if not the very first (by contrast, the first Soviet movie to feature a sex scene was 1988's "Little Vera"). Whatever the case, it remains an important piece of cinema history, and reminds us why Kieslowski was one of Europe's most influential directors.

lorilol I state for the record that I did not understand this film fully. The second plot with Solidarnost protester imprisoned and released by the court is not completely clear to me. Yet it has little to do with politics and more with human condition (ideals, expectation, compromise). Prisoner's family doesn't react happily upon his immediate release in a court room. There is awkwardness and embarrassment in that scene, as if some unforgivable compromise has been made and it tainted all of their relationship. Accident scene with a death of motorist seems random but reoccurring theme in Kieslowskij movies. Randomness of death, randomness of existence. Movie is wonderfully shot , music (as always) is haunting. I just cannot put it all together in my mind like I could with Veronique.

chaizzilla the movie seems to state it's "thing" directly at least twice: when urszula reads antek's notes to labrador, and in the poem read aloud by labrador near the end. for the longest time i couldn't find subtitles for it but my reason for wanting to see it so much i watched the first time without them was no, not b/c i liked "Blue", but b/c jerzy radziwilowicz is foxy. this was a good thing though, seeing it once without much grasp of the dialogue and once with nearly all of it available in translation made the way the dialogue turned so many of the scenes on their head stand out a lot, so i don't know how much the effect would have stood out seeing it all at once. the second time seeing it being much easier also, and made so many small things that happen in the movie turn up, including a couple of details i'm sure i would have understood if i simply had a regular amount of the context i think the movie's audience would be assumed to have. as a whole it felt a little like i'd been walking neck-deep in an immense but somewhat deceptively smooth river. when the movie was over it felt like it had been physically heavy, leaving one a little wobbly. but this is how it can feel when you become stretched between things going on and relationships. popular wisdom (over here anyway) tries to say one is more Real, and the other steals from this, but as much as this is true in some sense it is also from a perspective of either luxury or detachment. when labrador is hoping to coach darek's wife in getting her husband to break the hunger strike, he asks her, do you want him free? her answer seems to convey that stretch, "he'd kill me" (figuratively) isn't just about how he'd respond to her betraying this thing he's fighting for, it's not as simple as he's neglecting his family for this thing. everyone lives in that thing, labrador's assistant conveys another facet of it, which you can immediately see is selfish when he talks to darek, but so what? the hypnotherapist seems to point to other dimensions of the emotional toll of this paradox, and at the same time the sessions almost seem to concentrate a feeling spread throughout the movie. something about the vulnerability of the living characters in the setting of the movie, there's almost a feeling like everyone's sleepwalking but the dead. i'm guessing that is how someone like myself, who can only guess, picks up the movie's expression of the feeling of the systematic oppression in the setting of the movie. no end?