ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

Griff Lees Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Sarita Rafferty There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

secondtake The Mill and the Cross (2011)Maybe I anticipated this for too long, hearing about its production, and teaching in an Art History department myself. The result is both astonishing and boring as heck. I know, there is a kind of absorption that happens through silence and slow appreciation. And there is even the astonishment of looking without really thinking, or feeling, for the narrative or the characters.This is, for sure, a visually wonderful movie. The way it works out the scenery and milieu of a period based on a single painting is brilliant and ambitious. The mise-en-scene might in fact be the only and singular point of it all. So on that level, eleven stars. Terrific. Mind-blowing.But that exercise in naturalistic re-creation, in enlivening a masterpiece on canvas by Bruegel from 1564, is not, to me, enough. You will know after ten minutes whether to continue. I have heard of people being just spellbound by it all, so that hopefully would be your feeling. I tried to make the characters have meaning on some level, either in their interactions, or in their actions alone, or through what they did to the world around them. Much of what happens feels more medieval than Renaissance, to me, but I'm sure that was researched thoroughly. (Bruegel was painting at a time when the Renaissance from Italy had made its way thoroughly north to the lowland countries and beyond.)It is fun (and indicative of the seriousness here) that both Michael York and Charlotte Rampling took part, late in their careers. That was one of the draws, for sure. But don't expect revelations there, either. Expect in fact only what the director, Lech Majewski, intended—a film version of the painting, set in its larger context but always based on and drawing from this one admittedly fantastic painting. Which might be your starting point, before launching into this one and half hour homage.

petarmatic I really like when the come out with a film like this. I like costume dramas, but this one is so interesting because it was made based on a painting and it works with a very interesting subject of Protestantism in Flanders and tryouts of Spanish militia to eradicate it. Not a lot of the films was made about the subject, and it clearly shows desperation of the Spanish militia to eradicate, at that time, very strong Protestant movement in Flanders. How state of the affairs came to that? I would track it down to Pope Alexander VI Borgia and total corruption of the Curria of the late 1490s. It was inevitable that someone like Martin Luther to show up, and it was a downhill for the northern Europe from that time onwards as far as Roman Catholicism.Beside that, cinematography is great and costimography as well. True holiday for the eyes. I enjoyed every moment of it.

sdw1818 First, the film is based both on an excellent script and the work of a superb artist, Flemish master Pieter Bruegel. Next, the fact that the screenwriters and the director had the insight to make this film gives us hope that civilization has evolved. The original analysis of Bruegel's work by Michael Francis Gibson, who wrote the book on which the script was based, inspired Majewski to create the film--a feat, nothing less. One art form--painting--comes alive in another art form, film. Brilliantly conceived and executed.It is ultimately of little consequence that the film was not a 'box- office success' of epic proportions. Whoever wants to understand both art and the forces that shape civilization-- please see this film.

JvH48 Many thanks to the Rotterdam filmfestival 2011 for screening this guided tour through Christ Carrying the Cross, the painting by Pieter Bruegel the Elder. I learned a lot about the ideas behind it and the way it was set up. Seeing it explained gradually throughout the story, will let me remember it better than reading about it in a book.We also learned a lot about how people lived those days. A special mention should be devoted to the parts where this film demonstrates that life goes on, regardless of politics, war, and religions. We also saw many forgotten customs about bread, threshold cleaning, and much more that I want to leave as an exercise to the close observer.A dramatic moment at ¾ of the film is where the painter raises his hand, and life comes to a stand still, including the mill on the hill that stops by a hand signal of the miller. It seems no coincidence that the miller very much resembles how our Lord is pictured usually, and also that he oversees the whole panorama from his high position. As soon as he signals the mill to resume working, the whole picture relives from its frozen state.A large part of the audience stayed for the final Q&A. We got much information about the post production effort required to get the colors right, and creating the different layers to get everything in focus. Further, the film maker told he wanted to make a feature film from the start. It was considered a Mission Impossible by the people around him. How wrong they were!All in all, a lot goes on in the film, much more than I could oversee during the screening. Maybe I should try to grasp more of the fine details during a second viewing. I don't think I saw everything that the film makers did put into this production.