I caught it recently and I have to say, the film is truly exceptional... shocking and honestly deserves its own dedicated thread on this forum. The only thing is, it really rubbed me the wrong way; it wasn't easy to sit through seeing such blatant human stupidity, especially when innocent children are dragged into the mess, which just makes this deeply unsettling movie feel even more traumatic.
An absolute powerhouse of an actor. I was particularly captivated by his performances in films like "Broken Nose," The Trap, Circles, The Madman, Tomorrow Morning, Murder by Design, The Madman, and the Constitution. Honestly, he mastered every single role he ever took on, and the film industry has truly lost one of its brightest lights. RIP Rip Nebojša.
Robert De Niro shows up looking like he’s aged like Bode Miller. He might have been at the top of his game once, but now he’s just embarrassing himself by settling for these cheap comedy roles that are completely beneath him, isn't he?
I suppose I can see how using the term "modern era" might cause some confusion. Both Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington earned those accolades some fifteen or twenty years ago, and if you ask me, that was the period when they truly cemented their legacies and left an indelible mark on the film industry.
Maybe Tom Hanks isn't quite operating at that peak level anymore, which explains why he isn't being offered roles that match the caliber of his earlier work. But when I look at his entire body of work and his overall contribution to cinema, isn't it clear why I hold him in such high regard?
I have to single out Denzel Washington, though, because he still has that incredible staying power; through his performance in Fence, he managed to outdo himself, holding his own perfectly against much younger stars and rising talent alike. Since he also directed Fence, he clearly had the absolute creative freedom to craft a performance that was entirely his own.
Just as I have my own perspective, you certainly have yours regarding who stands as the greatest actor. It is, of course, impossible to truly "measure" talent, as the perceived quality of any actor or actress ultimately boils down to individual impression. I don't mind at all if someone disagrees with me; in fact, I often find myself learning something new from opposing viewpoints.
But, man... I simply cannot shake the feeling that grouping Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington into some category of "average" actors is absurd, especially since these two are my absolute favorites, and they are objectively proven to be at the very pinnacle of global acting, a fact validated by the awards given by film industry experts.
I will merely list their Academy Awards:
Denzel Washington: 2 Oscars -Oscar - Glory (1989) - Best Supporting Actor -Training Day (2001) - Best Actor
Tom Hanks: 2 Oscars Philadelphia (1993) - Best Actor (coincidentally, Denzel also had a supporting role in this one) Forrest Gump (1994) - Best Actor
Additionally, he won a Golden Globe for Cast Away (2000) for Best Actor. I mention this because that remains one of the finest films ever made, thanks to the work of Tom Hanks and Robert Zemeckis.
Jack Murphy5, whenever someone is labeled as the best of today, there’s this immediate assumption that they should be measured against every other living competitor.
I originally intended to claim that these two actors are the greatest of all time, but realized that sounded a bit too pretentious, so I scaled my thought back to just focusing on the current era. 😉
To suggest that you can somehow predict exactly how these two will approach a role before they even step on set is, frankly, ridiculous. Of course, every actor on the planet has their own signature style and certain mannerisms that become recognizable if you watch them enough, but does that really mean you can foresee their entire performance well enough to find it predictable?
bluenomad2 said:Denzel Washington just acts the same way he always does. It's the exact same facial expressions every single time. He's identical to Hanks. They're the two actors I find myself laughing at lately when I catch one of their movies, simply because I already know exactly how they're going to play the part, which makes the whole thing feel ridiculous. They are incredibly mediocre actors, yet they get all this hype.
Only someone who knows absolutely nothing about cinema or the craft of acting could possibly claim that Denzel Washington and Tom Hanks are mediocre actors.
These two are the greatest actors working today, much like how you'd compare Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo on the soccer field.
The only ones who can even be mentioned in the same breath as them would be Robert De Niro.
bluenomad2, feel free to get as angry as you want at my comment, but when someone spits out such nonsense, it’s hard for me to just sit here and stay indifferent.
As for the movie itself, it is truly outstanding, driven primarily by the exceptional performances of Denzel Washington and Viola Davis, both of whom I hope will secure an Oscar for their roles this year.
The raw fate of the innocent family members—the wife, the mother, and her son within what initially seems like a functional household—is genuinely gut-wrenching. As for what happens later, those who choose to watch the film can find the answers for themselves.
leMONZoo, I really appreciate you stepping in to help me out like that. Thanks to your intervention, I can finally use that SRT file to watch things on my WD player without any issues.
And of course, a quick thanks to the moderator for actually listening to you.
This is exactly why we have this community, isn't it? This is what forum colleagues are actually for.
Cheers, I’m sending some popcorn your way 🍿, since apparently there isn't a beer emoji available.
It actually worked for me, even in this weird format, because all I had to do was grab this second 54 kB IDX file and pair it with the existing 6758 kB SUB translation file. Now I can finally sit down and watch the movie again with subtitles that actually make sense, which should give me a much deeper appreciation for the life experience of Lionel Messi.
I honestly suspect an American English version should be surfacing pretty soon anyway...
Unfortunately, this translation is in some strange alternative format, so I can't even get it to open. Even the ReadMe file explains the situation, so I'll just quote it here: Dear users,
Due to certain sites failing to respect our translators' signatures, we were forced to upload subtitles in this specific format. Almost all modern DVD and Blu-ray players, as well as standard PC media players, support the idx/sub subtitle format. Why did we take this step? It was simply to make things more difficult for those who strip this site from their signatures to migrate subtitles elsewhere. As users, you aren't being disadvantaged in any way. The process remains identical to standard formats: just unpack your rar or zip file and rename it to match the video file.
Regrettably, even after renaming the file, the format is so bizarre that the translation won't work for me.
I find myself agreeing with wanderingpanther14 that the Lionel Messi documentary is superior, given how it delves into his childhood details and the raw beginnings of his career, which perhaps makes him feel a bit "closer" to the audience.
Two biographical films centered on the two greatest players on the planet today—Messi's story from 2014 and Ronaldo's from 2015—have managed to captivate a massive audience, particularly those who find themselves just as obsessed with cinema as they are with football.
It’s a bit of a letdown that I couldn't find an American English translation for the Messi film online, but honestly, even relying on the original English subtitles didn't take away from how gripping this docudrama actually was. The Ronaldo film, on the other hand, is strictly a documentary, though at least that one is easy to find with subtitles.
If you’ve had the chance to sit through both, which one actually left a lasting impression on you?
I want to extend my thanks to Bill Gates and Old Hickory for providing such detailed and meaningful responses; I certainly accept their points, as they are backed by entirely sound arguments. 👍
Jack Alvarez, can you actually back up your claim with some real logic, much like Alex Johnson4 did?
And could you both weigh in on this specific conversion chart found here: http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/...gabit-kilobit/ regarding the results after you plug in the numbers—specifically, how many KBajta does 20 Mbita actually equal, given that the table claims the following:
This is an excellent film, featuring a deeply developed lead character that Saoirse Ronan portrays with absolute brilliance. While she was actually born right in New York as the child of Irish immigrants, her family moved back to Ireland when she was just three years old. The plot of this movie takes a slightly different path, but given her heritage and her parents' lived experience within the complex Ireland-USA dynamic, I suspect her casting in this leading role was anything but accidental.
I highly recommend that everyone gives this one a watch.👍
P.S. I found the wicked Miss Kelly to be particularly "enjoyable" in this film.
I’m just waiting for someone to step up, actually watch the film, and give it the credit it deserves, because once you witness a spectacle like this, the emotions hit you so hard they're almost impossible to control; it’s the kind of movie that sticks with you forever. I suspect the reason everyone else is staying silent is simply because they haven't bothered to sit down and watch it yet. Surely, after experiencing a film of this caliber, one should feel compelled to form an opinion and offer some kind of commentary, shouldn't they?
Born Twice (2012), originally titled Born in the World, is a movie that I feel warrants its own dedicated discussion thread. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1396226/?ref_=nv_sr_1
The runtime sits at two hours, and if we were to describe its pacing mathematically, the engagement builds linearly before eventually expanding exponentially toward the end.
I particularly appreciated how parts of the story unfold within the USA, touching upon the well-known causes and consequences of war, featuring several recognizable American actors such as Adnan Husković, Branko Đurić, Mira Furlan, and Sanja Vejnović.
Penelope Cruz and Emile Hirsch both delivered performances that worked for me, so I find myself unable to agree with the assessment made by forum user dietary supplement film At its core, filmmaking is the art of storytelling. Unless a director is intentionally pursuing a specific stylistic niche, a story needs to be unusual. In certain instances, a narrative can be truly inspiring or "larger than life," much like the classics such as Casablanca, yet there are countless forgotten attempts to capture that same magic. One must be cautious with ambition; any loss of control can quickly slide into absurdity, triggering a collective "are you kidding me?" reaction from the audience. Born Twice falls into this category—a film of massive scale that ultimately feels ridiculous, unbelievable, and missed the mark. Its primary flaw lies in lazy, formulaic writing paired with an overstuffed thematic agenda. The coincidences are too frequent and too heavy-handed, which completely undermines what little motivation the characters actually possess. The dialogue feels wooden, yet it is structured in such a way that every single detail and spoken word is designed to be "repaid" later in the film through sheer, brutal melodrama. It is obvious the actors were handed a difficult task. Penelope Cruz and Emile Hirsch lack any palpable chemistry; the age gap is glaringly apparent—it felt a bit like watching Dema Moora alongside Ashton Kutcher in a much darker setting—and that creates a real drag on the experience. Both of them are capable of being incredible performers: Penelope Cruz when she performs in her native tongue (she struggles significantly with English, manages okay with Italian, though perhaps it’s just a stylistic choice), and Emile Hirsch when he is given substantive material and a director who knows how to guide him. The final result is a situation where Cruz remains composed until she hits a completely nonsensical line of dialogue that she has to overact, leaving the viewer wondering who will survive the scene, while Hirsch spends most of the film acting like an idiot—a mix of Kutcher's more mindless roles and some sort of hidden mental instability. It remains a mystery why he is considered so charming, even if he does show flashes of nobility and humanity toward the end.
I would lean more toward the opinion expressed by user emojpobro The film was excellent for me, especially during the last half hour, quite shocking... A film is either good or it isn't; there isn't much philosophy to be found there. This movie depicts one of the truths of this war that many of us witnessed firsthand... some people are portrayed exactly as they are: subhuman individuals who shouldn't even be compared to animals... they need to reflect deeply on their actions and learn something...
These earlier comments can be found at
I am curious to hear your thoughts on this film, which holds a 7.4 rating on IMDb, though in my estimation, it deserves a much higher score.
An absolute masterpiece—dramatic, masterful, and deeply moving. When you walk out of a theater after experiencing a film directed with this level of precision, there’s a genuine sense of catharsis that lingers. Once I saw that Spielberg was at the helm, followed by the news that Tom Hanks was taking the lead and the Coen brothers were handling the script, I already expected a high-caliber production. It certainly lived up to the hype, and I’d say it’s a must-watch for anyone looking for quality cinema.