A movie about the Armenian genocide, and that’s all ya got…”not very good.” Seriously though, I lived in Glendale for a while, the Armenian capital of L.A., and felt an obligation to see this. I guess maybe I don’t need to bother…which is good news.
Would that it were about the Armenian genocide. This is a vanity excersize in metatextuality, with a BS thriller element thrown in during the last reel because there is hardly any interesting conflict throughout the whole movie. I’ve liked many of Egoyan’s films in the past, but this is a misstep.
Hakob
on November 13, 2005 at 11:13 pm
Psst…
“This film has received much unfair criticism by incompetent critics working for all sorts of newspapers, magazines and websites. Incompetency is one. But it is also, most probably and in part, due to the fact that people don’t care about the topic to begin with and would have criticized it no matter how it was told or made.
The fact of the matter is that Ararat is the most original, imaginative and well-made movie to date that deals with the topic of a holocaust, which ever one it may be (Armenian, Jewish, Native American, African, etc.). It deals with the topic but doesn’t sacrifice the art. It’s not made to be a tear-jerker. Most stories about such historical incidents prey on basic human emotions and vulnerabilities because the purpose of those films is simply to gain sympathy. Nothing more. There is no consideration for contribution to the world of artistic film. They are not movies that are intended to contribute to the evolution of art. They are movies that take old-fashioned “tools” that have worked for whatever purpose for the past 80 years, and employ them again for similar purposes. It seems people are threatened by the fact that this movie did not do that and happened to be dealing with a topic that the whole world has been avoiding.
It is an excellent film. The concept and structure are not as complicated as some critics say they are. Either they are incapable of comprehending anything beyond a formulaic Hollywood flick or they were dismissing it from the get go. Either way, they should not be film critics. Ararat has a very clever structure based on the perspectives of different generations. The acting was excellent from everyone, except for Aznavour who did a decent job of executing a simple role. They all did exactly what the job called for and were simply captivating. The cinematography was beautiful: all of the creative choices regarding how to film a given scene were perfect.
Like all of Atom Egoyan’s films, it is very character driven, putting a lot of focus on the psychology of a character and the choices they make as a result. Though it is not Egoyan’s “number one” in my book, it is an amazing movie and can say I am honored to have seen it in theaters and am proud to own it.”
A movie about the Armenian genocide, and that’s all ya got…”not very good.” Seriously though, I lived in Glendale for a while, the Armenian capital of L.A., and felt an obligation to see this. I guess maybe I don’t need to bother…which is good news.
Would that it were about the Armenian genocide. This is a vanity excersize in metatextuality, with a BS thriller element thrown in during the last reel because there is hardly any interesting conflict throughout the whole movie. I’ve liked many of Egoyan’s films in the past, but this is a misstep.
Psst…
“This film has received much unfair criticism by incompetent critics working for all sorts of newspapers, magazines and websites. Incompetency is one. But it is also, most probably and in part, due to the fact that people don’t care about the topic to begin with and would have criticized it no matter how it was told or made.
The fact of the matter is that Ararat is the most original, imaginative and well-made movie to date that deals with the topic of a holocaust, which ever one it may be (Armenian, Jewish, Native American, African, etc.). It deals with the topic but doesn’t sacrifice the art. It’s not made to be a tear-jerker. Most stories about such historical incidents prey on basic human emotions and vulnerabilities because the purpose of those films is simply to gain sympathy. Nothing more. There is no consideration for contribution to the world of artistic film. They are not movies that are intended to contribute to the evolution of art. They are movies that take old-fashioned “tools” that have worked for whatever purpose for the past 80 years, and employ them again for similar purposes. It seems people are threatened by the fact that this movie did not do that and happened to be dealing with a topic that the whole world has been avoiding.
It is an excellent film. The concept and structure are not as complicated as some critics say they are. Either they are incapable of comprehending anything beyond a formulaic Hollywood flick or they were dismissing it from the get go. Either way, they should not be film critics. Ararat has a very clever structure based on the perspectives of different generations. The acting was excellent from everyone, except for Aznavour who did a decent job of executing a simple role. They all did exactly what the job called for and were simply captivating. The cinematography was beautiful: all of the creative choices regarding how to film a given scene were perfect.
Like all of Atom Egoyan’s films, it is very character driven, putting a lot of focus on the psychology of a character and the choices they make as a result. Though it is not Egoyan’s “number one” in my book, it is an amazing movie and can say I am honored to have seen it in theaters and am proud to own it.”
I highly suggest you read the review near the bottom of this page: http://imdb.com/user/ur2621227/comments?order=date&start=10