Fluentiama Perfect cast and a good story

Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

Holstra Boring, long, and too preachy.

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

gavin6942 An unprecedented look inside the private world of J.D. Salinger, the reclusive author of The Catcher in the Rye.I didn't know very much about J. D. Salinger, and frankly was not a huge fan of "Catcher" (though perhaps I should revisit it). That being said, this was an interesting look at a literary giant. I loved the WWII aspects, and I had no idea about Oona O'Neill; her relationship with Chaplin is legendary, but Salinger, too? The film's biggest weakness is that it could probably be trimmed by a good thirty minutes. Much of the running time is focused on actors commenting on Salinger and his work. I understand that they provide a name to help ell the documentary, but their opinions dob't really have any value if they never met the man.

eddie_baggins For a documentary that has at its disposal one of the most intriguing and mysterious figures in modern day history, it's a mighty shame that Salinger comes off so amateurish and lame, despite an ability to remain watchable thanks to its undeniably juicy content. This juicy content is so full of untapped goodness though, that in the end Salinger can be seen as a missed opportunity to truly get to the bottom of Salinger the writer once and for all.Filmed by screenwriter wunderkind Shane Salerno who has given us such screen gems as Armageddon and Alien Vs Predator: Requiem, the feeling of Salinger is all over the place with quite shoddy re-enactments and some questionable stock footage making up a large part of proceedings, it's clear that Salerno struggled to put all the right eggs in the quite large basket. For a film that runs nigh on 2 plus hours, by the films end you still get a niggling feeling that some details where skimmed over or other details played out to long and the things we do find out make us less likely to appreciate J.D Salinger as a person.I (as many others are) am a big fan of Salinger's work on Catcher in the Rye and while there are some interesting aspects and info shed about the book you can't help but feel a slight sense of sadness knowing that the man who wrote this novel was such a basket case of a human being. Parts of the documentary focusing on Salinger's personal life and preference for much younger women than he is, paints him as a preying type of male and his treatment towards his family and encounters with fans again displays him as a quite nasty human being. Whenever these aspects of the film take centre stage it makes it mighty hard to care for the story and the story works best when the focus is on Salinger's early life in the army and his return to normality afterwards. Other aspects of the film such as a horrid score and some random talking heads who have no real right being there again detract from a bizarre tale.Finishing off with some revelations and giving an insight to the man who wrote one of the most loved books of all time makes Salinger a passable film but one that can easily be written off as a misfire and with years spent on its construction it's hard to imagine how such a mundane effort was produced as the final product. For die-hard fans only, the rest of us would be well advised to read the man's famous novel once more.2 and a half New Yorker rejection letters out of 5 For more movie reviews and opinions check out - www.jordanandeddie.wordpress.com

Johnny-113 This is a fantastic documentary. I read the new book, "Salinger" a week prior and still thoroughly enjoyed the documentary. While there is more information in the book, the documentary provided all the emotion that is hard to derive from a book. It was amazing to see footage of Salinger that had never been released. This is not a one sided portrayal of the author. The film makers successfully show his attributes and weaknesses. None of the interviews were superfluous. The music was gorgeous. I've read criticism about the reenactments of Salinger typing in his room. I thought they were very appropriate and not overused. Errol Morris had many more reenactments in "The Thin Blue Line," but that, too was an excellent documentary. I had HIGH hopes about his documentary when I heard it was going to be released and I was not disappointed in the least.

crafo-1 I loved this movie and found it thrilling. Only a few days ago did I begin to read Salinger's short stories again as well as RAISE HIGH THE ROOFBEAMS, CARPENTERS. Of course everyone has read THE CATCHER IN THE RYE and I agree it remains a right of passage.I came to this movie with high hopes and that always scares me, because I set myself up for a downfall. This came through for me.It is an intense psychological portrait. The 299 days he spent at continuous war, from D-Day to the concentration camps, most certainly carved out his soul to his dying day. And how could it not? As someone who has always been interested in platonic love, I was very moved by his friendship(s) with young women that did not include sex.This movie thoroughly investigates the ego, drive, and mystery of this artist. The portrait is not always flattering and sometimes it is downright pitiful, but it seems genuine to me.I would recommend it to not only fans but also any writer or artist who knows something about the thrill of achievement and the horror of fame.I look forward to the publication of the posthumous work with relish.