SincereFinest disgusting, overrated, pointless

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Joe Castagna As a Gulf War Veteran who has tolerated enough crap from the Department of Veteran Affairs to last me five life times this movie nails the subject between the ears as it should be addressed. Those civilians who have never had to go through the most insane level of BS known to mankind have not a clue what the Veteran community tolerates as it pertains to acquiring services due the sacrifices we have made.This movie clearly represents the obfuscation, misinformation, lies, denial of services, and the withholding of information that those in charge of the VA tell the practitioners along with other employees to do. Very few times in life are there men and women who see all of the information, see the connections, see the injustice, only to take a step forward to put those in charge on their butt. These rare and rather heroic people stand up against the corruption as those who get the job done. Should you doubt what I am saying visit any VA Medical Center or federal office building where claims are filed in order to speak first hand to those who are in the middle of fighting for necessary services. Furthermore maybe, just maybe you can elaborate on why this movie was released in the shortest time frame only to be rushed through the country as quick as possible. As we certainly do not want to show "Any" government entity in a bad light… May God have mercy on the souls of those who delay, deny, and expect us to die as I along with many others shall have no mercy and give no quarter to such rats.

schell-7 We were out with new colleagues looking for a movie to go to after dinner. Our search took us from Wisconsin into Illinois, where "Article 99" appeared to be the most promising offering in a mall multiplex in the Waukegan area. The film was stunningly unmoving, unaffecting, unmemorable--the night such a complete waste that I simply had to bring back the title to confirm a long repressed memory (it was only the recollection of Kiefer Sutherland's credit that produced the title).There are a lot of possibilities with a film like this, which apparently attempts to be "socially relevant" humor or, as other reviewers have put it, a film with an important message. I don't buy the notion that great art--Shakespeare's plays or Faulkner's fiction--succeeds because of any "message," and the same pretty much goes for mere "entertainment." But whether realizing Welles' description of film as a "ribbon of dreams" or Godard's as "truth 24 frames per second," a film can make us participants in its storyline, situations, and conflicts while fulfilling the most important goal of art--i.e. to present an imitation of life that reveals us to ourselves-- and even imparting a sort of "message" (though I prefer Joycean "epiphany"), but we hear too many messages. The purpose of art is to make them unnecessary by giving us the "knowledge" to see for, and about, ourselves. "Article 99" succeeded in none of the foregoing areas. A film with as noteworthy a similar precedent as "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" simply left us numb, indifferent and apathetic, quickly flying out our memories.If a lesson is to be learned from viewing a movie such as this (and it's important to watch bad movies to know what a good movie is, or bad Altman films to know what a good Altman film is), it's that the setting matters little if the director's vision and approach or the screenplay's storyline doesn't "make" it matter. And in this film--apparently intent upon exposing the futility of practices occurring in a V.A. hospital--setting is everything. But the setting is cramped, collapsed, squeezed so tightly by an over-burdened script implemented by unimaginative, propaganda-grade direction that neither the audience nor the actors have any space to breathe in let alone become involved with the actions of the story.Contrast this over-controlled environment, this anal, sterile, feeble imitation of life in a V.A. hospital with Robert Altman's "controlled extemporaneousness," or imaginative vision, that gave us a completely open, vibrant and real, alternately funny, sad, and awe-inspiring, complex and unforgettable movie about a place that is also the title of the film--"Nashville." Not only are we taken on an unforgettable journey through a diverse city but we come to know and empathize with no fewer than 24 characters who are working out their destinies in the city that even now serves as a microcosm of American mass popular culture, representing all those seeking fame and fortune, celebrity and success. Ultimately, perhaps because in every viewer there's a hidden desire to be significant, to be "star" (if only in the eyes of his or her creator), we learn something about ourselves, emerging sadder but wiser for the experience. At such a moment, you also begin to see why some of us would rather read Shakespeare than Stephen King (or, after seeing "Nashville," have no patience with an Altman "dud" like "Ready to Wear," a satire of the fashion world that by the mere choice of subject is inextricably weighed down by the director's failure of vision).

lord woodburry Once upon a time in the Reagan administration, a cog in the cabinet discovered to his amazement that with all the US veterans floating out there from the abysmal failure in Vietnam, the sheer cost of treating them as they aged would skyrocket.Thus it was decided to abolish their problems. See in Bushist America we ignore any problem that we don't want to face.The movie brings up a valid point. The VA has failed in its mission. And the situation from the time the movie was released has worsened. With 80,000 in treatment from the latest war the issues raised by this movie are ones that need to be addressed.Regrettably by reading some hijinx from M * A * S * H into the civil service bureaucracy of the VA and creating a feel good ending the scriptwriters muted the very point they'd like to have made. I gave this a ******* 3 ******** for all its comic but unfunny unrealism. The movie compares with John Q for the unrealistic expectations foisted upon the viewer.It's betterto Tell it like it is than to pretend a social problem is getting better!

jane-42 This is clearly a film that has it's heart on it's sleeve and wants usto get outraged about the injustice and 'red tape' that is holding upour VA system. Made before the glut of hospital shows such as ER orChicago Hope, it features many of the same ideas and stories, but shotin a better way. The camera work is fine in this film, much better thaneither of those tv shows. The acting is too, for the most part. I feltthe film was stolen by the great Eli Wallach, who walks away with everyscene he's in. I ended up feeling sorry for Kiefer Sutherland who had toshare the screen with Wallach- it was like watching a kid playbasketball with Michael Jordan. Ray Liotta does a fine intense job, andthe supporting roles are all wonderful. The great Kathy Baker is all butwasted, but does a great job. Lynn Thigpen has a small role, but doesit with her usual dignity and grace. Kieth David, John Mahoney andJeffrey Tambor all bless us with their talents, and I ended up wishingthe movie focused more on them than on the 'pretty young things'. Ifanything does not work with this film I'd have to say it was thedirecting or the editing- for some reason it doesn't come together in asatisfying way, despite some fine performances. Also, I'd just recentlyseen M*A*S*H*, which sets the bar pretty high for this kind of movie.And not to compare apples and oranges, but if you're looking for a'things are screwy in the medical profession' film, M*A*S*H* would bethe best way to go.