ThiefHott Too much of everything

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Odelecol Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Armand too much. too strange. a lot of questions, each important, each profound, cruel and delicate in a huge ball. a cast in a kind of movie-play in which only form of survive is science to use a mask. marriage crisis, coming up of a young man among shadows, a wife like a Bergman character if she is not a zombie, a daughter in search of something , an activist like Don Quijote without money for psychoanalyst, a father face to face with his past errors. the sin of movie - use of very good actors in a chaotic experiment.or ambition to say all without basic rules. it may be modern art. if it is a picture. but it is only a poor movie. beautiful as intention. not very seductive as final work.

Brigid O Sullivan (wisewebwoman) I didn't expect much from this DVD picked up in a remainder bin. I was in for a delightful surprise.Based on a stage play by David Grieg, the story draws together the main theme of Leo Waters, played with nuance and emotional subtlety by Anthony Paglia, the architect and his design of a building project several years ago and his subsequent disconnection from it, reflected in the disconnection from his wife, Julia (Isabella Rosellini) who is completely underused, and his children.The film begins with Leo's son, Martin, dropping out from college. Martin is troubled, furtive and secretive.Viola Davis is the activist in the projects, eager to tear down the buildings and get the area cleaned up who butts heads with Leo.Hayden Panatierre plays the teenage daughter just coming into her own sexuality and experimenting in bars and stranger hookups unbeknownst to her parents. An excellent performance.How all these threads come together, and in some cases come apart, is the heart of the movie. The audience is expected to think and draw their own conclusions and the ending is very satisfying, an emotional confrontation between a father and son.The cast are flawless as is the script and the quick incisive simultaneous snapshots of different scenes move the story arc forward.8 out of 10. Not to be missed.

Matti Czaja I thought that the premise of the movie was very interesting and a good reflection of how living conditions, (less then the architecture itself) affect social interaction and psychology. The activist claims that people in the projects are "piled" on top of each other and I thought it was an accurate description of the reality of public housing. The rest of the movie was less interesting and confusing at times. The mother and daughter characters were seemingly out of place, especially the mother's character. The sexual overtones were likewise somewhat difficult to connect with the story. I think more could've been done to develop what started off as a good story about a compelling urban issue.

enedzel I just saw this film last night at the Denver Film Festival and didn't think it was very good. From what I have read about the original play, that sounds like it would have been the better version to see. The dialog in this film did not sound real to me. The characters were not developed. I didn't understand why the mother was so unhappy. I couldn't believe, or have sympathy for, the daughter's choices. I didn't buy the relationship between the black boy and the white boy at all. The part of the story about black woman's family was more believable but still not explored enough. Also, I think most Chicagoans will have trouble with the veracity of some of the scenes. I lived all my life in Chicago until two years ago and, I'm sorry, white teenagers do not hang out in the projects. Nor do their white fathers go there at night and hang around on roof tops smoking cigarettes.