Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Tayyab Torres Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Cristal The movie really just wants to entertain people.

Roedy Green This a truly unique film. It is just a man at a desk, with maps behind him, talking. Nothing else happens. Yet it is so spellbinding you don't even dare blink.When I was a kid my parents would read to us. They would make up different voices for each of the characters. My uncle Tom had a special story-telling voice. He would tell tales about his life and the people he met, relishing the details, letting you experience almost for yourself what happened. Spalding Gray is like that, only a pro.It is about war, drugs, sexual decadence in Thailand, making movies, relationships, mania... He has so much to tell you. It just comes tumbling out in a rush.I avoided the movie all these years because I thought it would be just another shoot-em-up.He opens up his head and lets you in to look around, like a friend who lets you drop in without calling first. He has no embarrassment about his imperfections. He was such an open, lovable, exuberant guy. He committed suicide in 2004 after complications from a car accident made life unbearable.

dna007 I was lucky to find a copy of Swimming to Cambodia many years ago at the public library. I felt this was lucky indeed because our next-door neighbor is Cambodian and a close personal friend of the man befriended by the reporter in the movie the Killing Fields.This was at a time in my life that I felt obligated to finish any movie I began watching. I have since learned that life is too short for such indulgences. Partly, or most likely, due to this film. You may have guessed that "lucky" is truly not how I now feel about finding this movie.In any event as I said I was compelled to watch the entire movie. This turned out to be a task that lasted nearly a week. Each day I would watch as much as I could stand. Others have praised this movie as having humor and insightful knowledge. My poor brain could not grasp most of what was being said. At times it required rewinding to see parts I missed upon awakening.I truly did not understand the movie. Actually I hesitate to even call it a movie. Really, even though picking up a glass of water to drink during the speech does require movement does that make it a move?.If you find watching grass grow too exciting you should give this a look, else my recommendation is, well anything else is time better spent. The only exception I can think of is someone smart enough to understand it.Rating 1 out of 10. I would go lower if possible.Just for the record, I review very few movies. This is my only negative review.

aculprit Jonathan Demme is a genius, and if you doubt it, see this film. Who else could've made a man sitting at a table talking so riveting? Although Spalding is a great storyteller and great to see live, none of the other films of his monologues have ever touched this one, the first.See it and you'll never drink Singha again.

zetes One day a couple of years ago, while I was waiting for a television show, I was flipping through the channels and I caught part of Spalding Gray's monologue film -Monster in a Box- and I was so blown away by it that I missed the show that I had been waiting for. I don't know why it took me so long to rent another one of his monologue films, but this week I picked up his first one, -Swimming to Cambodia-. It was good, but nowhere near as good as -Monster in a Box-.For one thing, -Monster in a Box- was very well directed, and the "special effects" do not get in the way. But in -Swimming to Cambodia-, the sound effects are often too loud, and thecutting is too quick and artsy, when it should have been nothing but slow pans and zooms, sort of like -My Dinner With Andre-. Then there is this awful effect with the lights, basically shutting them off to cut the emotional rhythm. This was unneeded. Gray's performance itself establishes rhythm enough.My second big complaint is with the monologue itself. It is mostly very interesting, but it is not polished or cohesive. Just as he does in -Monster in a Box-, Gray alternates between very hilarious narrative (such as the descriptions of the sex acts in Thailand) and very harrowing narrative (such as the descriptions of Pol Pot's revolution). That technique works extraordinarily in -Monster in a Box-, but the two halves of the narratives don't seem to do with each other at all. The funny half concerns the work on the movie -The Killing Fields-, and the harrowing half very intensely examines the true story of the Kamir Rouge and America's dealing with these kinds of situations. Also, the monologue seems to end almost arbitrarily.This film is definitely worth a rental. It is under 90 minutes, which I always count as a plus. But if you want to be impressed, rent -Monster in a Box-. 7/10