#1 ·
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.
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.