Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Roxie The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

adiamantex17 "Two characters making love sopping in paint on Yom Kippur while everyone else takes part in religious activities. You don't get much more sac-religious than this. So we know this is not a propaganda film." Except that any film, pro or anti war, can be a propaganda film, sacrilegious or not. Also, to be a great anti-war film, a film needs to be watched and needs to draw viewers to it. This film does not do that. However the director meant the film, I simply saw it as a auto-biographical film about his own life during the Y.K war and not a particularly effective one at that.

zardoz12 As others have written, "Kippur" is about two IDF soldiers of the 1973 Yom Kippur war who can't find their unit and join up with helicopter medevac group. Thus we do not see the war, but what happens minutes or hours after the lead stops flying. I think "Kippur" is closer to reality than most war pictures because the men say little, we don't know much about them (except for the doctor), and boredom is rule. The director spends five excruciating minutes showing us how the men extricate a wounded and unconscious soldier from a huge mudhole; they keep dropping him, and have to pick him up without a stretcher and drag him to a dry spot. We never see the enemy, and there is but one scene of action in the entire film (and I can't give it away.) "Kippur" is definitly for the war film afficionado who wishes to see the aftermath or the peacenik who knows the futility of armed conflict, and wants to see two hours of it.

chimeira Kippur was a big disappointment for me, to see such an experienced director like Gitai come up with such a poor film like this. The opening scene -the boy running in the deserted streets during war time- was really very beautiful. The shot was very successful, with great direction talent. Then, after this scene, little waves of disappointment started to flow through me. Firstly in the scene where the boy and his girlfriend were making love in the paint, the music was so inappropriate and annoying and the scene took too long. Having seen the same guy in these first two scenes, I thought ''ok, he is the leading guy''. And in all movies, you feel the need to sympathize with a character in order to be able to get yourself in the movie. This is how you can feel for the people in the film, and how you can get into the director's head. Anyway. What I felt all through Kippur was not a sense of sympathy for any of the actors, but rather that the film was like a parade of people wandering around. No one was the leading character. One character comes up and says something important and you never see him again. One character begins telling a story in one scene, yet he does not continue with it in the rest of the movie and you try so hard to figure out where that should belong in the film as a whole. Dialogues were very poor. The sentimental side of the war was trying to be conveyed to the audience obviously, but the words used were so poor at describing soldiers' feelings. Most scenes were so unnecessarily long, long silences didn't carry any meaning, and editing was very bad %90 of the time. As for the ending, it was so plain and so poor. Not only could I not sympathize with a character, I also could not get that feeling of relief when the guy returned to her girlfriend and they started making love again. At the start they made love, in the middle he made war, and at the end, love again. This was not such a unique idea and especially when it's tried to be given in such unsuccessful and wrong ways, a great disappointment is caused for the audience. I had hoped to ''feel'', but I couldn't unfortunately. The film lacked that emotion and philosophy.Having seen an excellent movie like Thin Red Line, I cannot help but compare and contrast Kippur with that. The weakness of Kippur is highlighted then. I absolutely felt something during Thin Red Line -the war, the pain, the anguish, the lightness of death and all- especially in the final scene where the leading actor James Caviezel -there was a leading actor there- was floating free in the water and talking freely in his mind, I felt something in my throat, keeping me on the edge of crying. I felt him, I felt what the director meant, I felt the war, I felt the movie. Thin Red Line is an incomparably successful war film. I have seen Saving Private Ryan too, a beautiful film more showing the war zone and with great special effects, but Thin Red Line is the one in my all time favorites. Not everything that starts well goes well...

jsexton-2 When the siren sounds the two main characters head off to do their part for the Israeli state. The bookends on the movie place the context of war as an eventuality that, like working, has to be done. The action doesn't take place at the front but with a medical evac unit who's cleaning up the wounded after the action has moved on. My two reasons for liking this film are the creative camera work and the battlefield sounds and visuals. Early in the film when they're looking for their unit they do accidentally drive right into the front lines and the viewer (camera) is placed right in the back seat of their Fiat as they scramble to get turned around. My one complaint. The characters lack development. Overall an enjoyable film.