Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Ketrivie It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Irishchatter After watching "Maid of Manhattan" recently with Natasha Richardson(RIP) and Ralph Fiennes, I decided to give this film a go. I thought the film was so so good. However I don't understand why Fiennes had to put an American accent onto this because he can't do a Amercian accent!! I always thought as the blind English Diplomat not American at all! They either should've got someone better or written the character off if they weren't going to get the character development right among the actors! Anyways moving in, I loved how himself and Richardson's relationship developed throughout the whole film. The story- line was sad because it was set in near World War 2 and the fact people running for their lives to Japan (I think)in order to be safe from the soldiers. Omg one scene that even more frightened me as well was, when Fiennes character met with the soldiers face to face. I really thought they were gonna shot him right on the spot but thank god, he made it out alive and let him go without hesitant!I really liked this film, it really shows the history of China and it had a good cast to entertain us with their fine acting. I give this movie 8/10!

didiermustntdie one of the family members supposes to be a princess, I call it a joke, even though the story is fictional. the Russian refugees were actually largely lower class "white" Russians from Russian far east. the story is made up by a Japanese writer ,so I can understand why japs are given quite many undeserved dignities. but in fact japs were never so generous nor powerful.actually the west didn't take japan seriously at the time they invaded shanghai, the largest foreign community in china. both Chinese and whites are portrayed OK, white slightly degraded. seem like although no apparent race mixing, there isn't any racial tension in 30s, .but I heard during the time, Chinese weren't allowed to enter concessions,at least not so easily..just like happy tourists....my 2 main concerns about the film are 1, the french influence is underrated.before Japanese came, shanghai was actually run by french.but they don't give a single role to frenchmen.OK, i know the french were/are very corrupt leftists, so the place became quite chaotic, and relatively less conservative compared to British owned hong Kong, so the family want to move to hongkong,that is reasonable..2, the Jewish thing, according to my knowledge, jews who escaped Germany occupied Europe were mostly rich people, they become quite influential wherever they arrived..the only untouchable citizen in shanghai I heard were not Brits, not yanks,not even Germans but jews.. it's said on wikipedia that about 10000 jews during WWII in shanghai and all of them survived and returned to Israel.. on wikipedia, the only group that referred as being treated differently were jews. surprised? when I saw the Jewish old man being insulted several time in the movie, I laughed terribly. even in shanghai, they couldn't forget to victimize jews..(I swear I even saw beautiful Natasha put an embarrassed grin on her face when the fisherman shouts"Jewish scum!".)BTW, Macao is safe because protugual owns brazil which had about 1 million Japanese, some liberal moron says Macao is probably better than hongkong i agree.except for the things I said. this movie is good enough. similar feeling to the "remains of the days", Natasha's character is very good woman,although lost dignity, as the movie implies she actually only sells herself very occasionally when really in need for money ,far from everyday escort.we saw her reject several good enough potential clients oh, well, the Russian family is also cartoonish villains..even though there are so many from liberal political agenda, I moderately enjoyed this movie.there should be more movies like this showing whites are weak and in danger of non white threat honestly, there are too many "white supremacism" in movies now-days..the saddest thing is both Natasha and producer are impossible to read my genuine opinions now..

arturus This, the last of the Merchant/Ivory collaborations, is a long, rich and well-crafted film, a fitting finale to the collaboration of these two. It is perhaps a little too long and doesn't quite fit together, but the rich visuals, the intriguing characters, the evocation of time and place, the richly effective musical score and the fine, nuanced acting pull you right in and keep you watching, just as all of their films have done.As I say, one of the strengths of the film is the acting, by the Redgraves, mother, daughter and aunt; by the supporting cast, and by the lead actor. The Redgrave sisters, Vanessa and Lynn, give a splendid evocation of exiled Russians, perhaps from the experience of playing Chekov. Venessa's daughter Richardson is less successful: though she is beautiful and intriguing in the part, her attempt at a Russian accent is really awful.Fiennes gives an insightful performance as a recently blinded man who has lost his family under tragic circumstances. I had blind parents, grew up around blind people and am legally blind myself (partially sighted) so I must say that though his interior life is spot on, his playing "blind" is really inaccurate and unbelievable, both as the character in unfamiliar and in familiar surroundings. This may be partially the fault of the screenplay. First, a small detail: no blind person can eat with chopsticks. It's impossible! Secondly, his inconsistent use of a walking stick as a cane. A short stick like that would give him next to no information concerning what is in front of him and would be essentially useless, except as a prop; as an actor, Fiennes' use of it is inconsistent and not accurate. Third, when the character expresses a desire to "see" the Countess's face by feeling it...well, I'm sorry, but NO blind person does that! In fact the idea is quite abhorrent, even offensive to us. This only happens in the movies and it provides one of the few false moments in the picture.The other false moment is his mad dash through the crowded Shanghai streets to find the Countess. It is wildly melodramatic, way over the top and unbelievable. Again, this is the screenplay's fault. Fiennes tries to downplay the melodrama by underplaying, but it still comes across as false.My other problem with Fiennes' performance is that he plays the character as a modern American man, not as an upper class American of that time, much too, well, "Kevin Kostner". This character is upper class with money, an American diplomat. If this were a 1930s picture I CAN imagine an Englishman playing him, but he would be more like Ronald Colman or Robert Donat. If an American of that time were to play this character, he would be Tyrone Power, not Humphrey Bogart. Though Bogart did in fact come from an upper class New York family, he almost never played that in the movies.Among modern American actors, I think only Kevin Kline could play this character accurately, with the right speech and manner, as a well educated, upper class American of the early 20th century. Most other American actors of his generation just lack the technique to pull it off.Within the choices he made, Fiennes does very well. His American accent is quite consistent and very good, though occasionally he speaks his lines using English "speech melody" rather than authentic American intonations.Overall, I found this to be a satisfying picture, telling a good story on a large, rich canvas, in the Merchant/Ivory tradition, a fitting ending to their collaboration.

Danusha_Goska Save Send Delete Warning! This review contains spoilers. It will reveal the end of the movie. If you don't want to know the end of the movie, don't read this review."White Countess"' advertising is misleading. The poster depicts the very handsome Ralph Fiennes passionately kissing the very beautiful Natasha Richardson. "Echoes of Casablanca!" a review is quoted.Well ... no. This ain't "Casablanca," and it is not, primarily, a passionate love story."White Countess" is also not a deep or important movie. It's not saying big things in an aesthetically successful way.Really what it is is a chilly, stodgy, art class exercise. Script writer Kazuo Ishiguro has received highbrow critical acclaim, and he's trying to be smart and important here, and he fails.Basic story: exiled Russian countess Sofia (Natasha Richardson), in the post-Revolutionary, pre-WW II era, does taxi dancing, and perhaps also prostitution, in Shanghai. She thereby supports her miserable, scheming, whining, unattractive, lazy, parasitic family. Two members of the family are played by Richardson's real life family, Lynn and Vanessa Redgrave.Blind American Todd Jackson, (Ralph Fiennes) opens a new nightclub, and hires Sofia to be his hostess.Eventually, the Japanese invade, and Todd, Sofia, her daughter, her Jewish neighbor and his daughter, escape on a boat.And that's it. Why does this story take over two hours to tell, and to tell coldly, leaving most viewers and critics surprisingly unmoved? Because it's all a big metaphor. Todd Jackson, blind American, who connives to get Japanese, Chinese, thugs, socialites, in his bar, is a symbol of America. He's always smiling, and he seems like a nice guy, but he keeps messing with foreign affairs.It is revealed, through flashbacks, that he used to be a diplomat, and was involved with the League of Nations. He befriends Matsuda, a Japanese man and, what do you know, the Japanese invade Shanghai. Those d*** Americans, scriptwriter Ishiguro implies; if only they didn't mess with things, the Japanese wouldn't have committed all those atrocities in China.Yeah, it is that silly. And pseudo-deep.Also, Jackson is attracted to Sofia, as he states in so many words, because she is a beautiful woman with a tragic past. That arch, intellectual distance from any spontaneous human emotion, any real human contact, is the tone of the entire film. It's like an abstract painting, pushing the viewer away from any involvement with the characters.Given what an art class exercise and mind game this movie is, it was utterly dishonest of the filmmakers to advertise it as a romance for the ages.Fiennes and Richardson kiss once, and it is awkward and unpleasant. "Casablanca"? I don't think so.The sets are lovely, though. They do convey a sense of Shanghai in a perilous moment.And the performances, for what they are, are great. Natasha Richardson does a very nice Russian accent. She plays her part -- that of a stupid, bullied, and thereby unappealing Russian countess, well.Fiennes is a phenomenon. I don't know if his performance here should be praised or dissected. His American accent is very good, and his phony smile never fades. But his performance is in service of a cypher, not a real part, not a real human being, and a plot that is didactic and pretentious rather than in service to telling a human story.