SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic

Freaktana A Major Disappointment

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

mark.waltz Sometimes as stunning as a museum visit, often turn away ugly, and filled with starts and stops that would be more potent as a limited series, where detail could have been greater. A lot is covered in two hours in this brutal look at an ugly time in the many chapters of world history. This takes place during the reign of the great restoration king Charles II of England and Great Britain, a ruler whose life had been part of "Forever Amber" and later the lengthy cable continuing series "The Stuarts", a major part of the often filmed "Nell Gwynn", and as notorious a ladies man as his distant cousin of a century before, Henry VIII. Sam Neill looks the part in the most commanding if ways, subtle in his nobility, yet flamboyant in his excesses.The era was a great time of change in England, and this story focuses on one particularly complex man. Robert Downey Jr. proves once again his great versatility as a great doctor, hired for the king's court, who looses his gift for medicine from an unrequited love for Polly Walker, part of an arranged marriage set up by the king. Downey is dismissed, goes off to treat those suffering from a plague, falls in love once more (with peasant girl Meg Ryan) and proves his strength as a doctor, even under the most tragic circumstances of his own life. There are moments when I had to turn my head, particularly a scene at the beginning involving a patient of Downey's whose chest cavity is open, exposing his innards as he stands erect. The plague scenes are realistically gruesome, with no hiding of the ugliness of that era. Charles' court is lavish, almost operatic in its sets, and the music is gloriously profound. Still, there's a missing element that makes it stand out as terrific, although it's a marvelously good try.

T Y "By the books" mid-90s historical epic, that like others of the era (Dangerous Beauty, Emma, Cousin Bette...) now feels slight and superficial; even corny at parts. The story is elaborate, but played mostly for sentiment. No villain, no chase, or explosions. But the piece of history covered is interesting in and of itself. And no movie about friendship is completely worthless. Prior to 2001, movie-makers scoured the storybooks for the right material to squeeze emotion out of you; and they frequently felt the need to time travel to do so (Titanic). This ruse now feels rather stretched, insufficient and manufactured.Not a complete waste of time, but reaction will depend on the viewer. There are some elaborate sets. Meg Ryan here is not making a good enough effort, or she knows that she shouldn't have taken the part. Hugh Grant's early stammering is on display.

tedg You take a risk in filming any book, but here we have one of these fat simple books that flow easily and have simple substance. Its targeted at the sorts of things that appeal to romance readers: redemption, a hostile world, love, discovered honor. The book is a cartoon with faux travails from a lurid homeworld. If you were going to make a film of this without changing the book very much, and targeting the same audience as the book. You couldn't turn the story into something interesting, true or valuable. You couldn't make these characters matter. Lucky, because the director is incapable of doing so.What you could do is be lush. You'd create a home world that is lurid, with the earth sexually excited. You'd have full reds in a tumescent space (and rainy greys in contrast). You'd have novel ornamentation, excessive costumes. That's what we have here. As with other commentors, I say that the only thing interesting here are those sets. In this case, two women anchor and become part of the sets: one dark redheaded and one light. Oddly, neither are photographed as beautifully as they have been elsewhere.What's interesting is how our set designer has folded the sets. You can't have an intelligent introspected story because the book is so pedestrian . But you can have folded sets. We have a wall of receding arches that is really a tapestry through which the king enters. We have a model of London, in which the king and our hero meet. And the best of all, we have an Orrery with the king at its center. An Orrery, if you don't know it is a mechanical model of the solar system. Its a marvelous thing, and has an iconic meaning in films where it is used. I collect these images because they are so few and deep. This is the loveliest I know.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

ucberkeley428002 Robert Downey, Jr. was terrific as always in Restoration.When I give reviews on films or when I tell family or friends about films, I like to go into detail of why I liked each character, the writing, the actors' performance, etc...With "Restoration", I can't do that here. Why? Because I would ramble and go on typing forever. This is, to put it simply, an outstanding film. Sure, there are aspects of the historical time that didn't jive, but this film was meant to entertain, not to give us a history lesson.It was masterful. The performances of the leading couple were breathtaking. Great directing and writing.The film is wonderfully done. Although when the trailer was first aired and I wanted to see it very badly, the first time I actually saw it was in the theater.