Christian,
[spoil]kypade[/spoil]

I went to see this tonight. It was either this or Underworld, and I made the assumption that this would be the better movie... and I doubt I'll be proven wrong.

Like everyone else said, the screenplay was excellent. The dialog was great, and it really made a lot of the scenes in the beginning part of the movie stand out, despite the fact that the movie really dragged in the beginning. The luck theme really carried out well, and I loved the connection between the tennis ball in the opening to the ring towards the end of the movie. It all fit together rather nicely. Also like others, I didn't thank Scarlett was anything special. She had a few scenes that were well acted, like when she confronts Chris as he's leaving his job, but other scenes just weren't convincing from me. It wasn't a bad performance, just not a great one. Jonathan Rhys Meyers, on the other hand, I thought was just excellent. I believed what I was seeing.. I could feel his emotions and know what he was going through. I thought his emotional scenes were very well acted. I also liked his acting when he's committing the murders, when he's shaking and nervous and kicks the bag off of the coffee table. He was very convincing and his character felt real. The ending was one of the best I've seen... when the ring bounces off the railing and falls back down, I thought that it was going to lead to him being convicted for the muder. I was, I admit, a bit surprised when it turns out a robber who shot and killed another victim had the ring in his pocket, and Chris suffered no consequences. The ending just had me thinking for a long time after the movie finished. The only real problem I had with the movie was the begininng. It seemed drawn out and a lot longer than it needed to be. I thought I wasn't going to enjoy the movie when I was watching it, because the beginning pretty much bored me. My sister even started checking her watch for the time. The movie does pick up its stride, and the rest of it is enough to make you forget the start though.

I really enjoyed the movie and would reccomend it.

A-

I guess I'm the only person that liked the beginning more than the end? I liked the formation of the relationship with Mortimer, the buildup to the affair, the reconnection with Johansson, and how we get to see Rhys-Meyers' character very slowly unhinging. It all seemed quite natural (well maybe not the kissing in the rain scene, one would think they'd at least have umbrellas in London), and the acting, even by Johansson I thought was pretty strong. I liked the concept of the ending, and the haunting was a particularly inspired touch but this is were things get a bit sketchy. I knew what Woody Allen was going to do with the ending and why, but we still had to jump through one too many plotholes to accept that happening including a rather inept police department. And then there was what I have termed "the Johansson Shrieking" portion of the film where my ear drums tried to pry themselves out of my head and scamper out of the theater. Overall it was very entertaining, tightly wound and somewhat disturbing, I give it an A-.

Actually the audiences I saw the movbie with laughed at his response in a "Wow, that was harsh" kind of way.

Woody Allen's examination of luck's role in everyday life has a brilliant, darkly funny, but often plain scary script, rich performances, and stylish, beautiful cinematography. A good old-fashioned story well-told and 2005's best film.

A+

I loved the film. I think this is the first Allen film I've seen ( ) so I can't really say how it compares with his other work but I'd say he did a fine job. The whole cast is terrific.

He's Back!

Woody Allen is in top form with this positively Shakespearean tale. This movie is really something special and demonstrates Allen's uncompromising artistic vision of life.

(Though, even I had to cringe at the cruel way in which he showcased Scarlett Johansson's limited acting ability - Yow!)

I mean within the context of the movie it certainly was effective, but as a career strategy for Johansson, it almost seems foolhardy. She is just a little too convincing as a mediocre actress.

The rest of the cast however is sparklingly perfect. Emily Mortimer and Jonathan Rhys-Meyers are especially extraordinary! The screenplay is sharp and dark and leads you on an unexpected, yet satisfyingly archetypical ride. This is one of Woody Allen's most assured works - he is working at the height of his skill and artistry here. This is a fantastic movie!

6 out of 5.

(Note: Moves onto my top ten list for 2005!)

PLEASE VOTE FOR IT IN THE KJ AWARDS

Thanks.

I finally saw it nad it was great, Rhy-Meyers was awesome, ubt given the crowded year he is beiing ignored. We all new the ending was coming ( esepcially if you saw the trialer that basically told you) but this film is not about what happens but how. The dialogue was spot, all the little things were right.

Rhys-Myers definitely delivered one of the finest male performances of the year, too bad he got zero awards talk, he'd deserve it. Same goes for Robert Redford in An Unfinished Life.

I don't think trailer gives the ending away. It actually tricked us into thinking Scarlett's character might have done harm to Rhes-Myers' family.

I knew that Johansson would die before I saw the movie because someone spoiled it to me. I had a slight hunch when I saw the trailer, but anyway...the ending is still great and shocking in the way HOW Chris kills Nola (and someone else) and HOW he gets away with it. That was brilliant.

One of the five best screenplays of the year, still.

One question: did Nola really get preganent? Or was she just claiming that to get Chris leave his wife? Because I was wondering why the police/detective never mentioned it, as the autoposy should immediately tell and put more motive and suspicion on Chris.

A very much discussed point at IMDB. It is up to interpretation, but the kind of a person she is, she could have easily lied. Besides that, she would have probably written it into her diary as well...

That's a very good question, and yes, I won't be surprised if she lied about that too.

I mean, she still kept smoking and drinking (though that could mean she's either careless or just really, really dumb).

The kind of a girl she played, who changes her mind a lot, is quite needy and keeps nagging...that really wouldn't have been a surprise. It's a good thing Allen left that open, though.

Best Breakthrough, yo.

Finally saw it.

Match Point is brilliant. I've never seen Allen's work (well, like half of Melinda and Melinda, which I didn't find to be good), but this was just fantastic. Great performances from Scarlett Johannson and an even better Jonathan Rhys-Meyers.

It really kept me at the edge of my seat until the ending I did not see coming after some of the events of the film.

A.

Good to see that (almost) everyone agrees that Rhys-Myers delivered the movie's best performance that is shamefully ignored all around.

If it wasn't for the first hour or so, it'd have been A-territory for me too.

What didn't you like about the first hour?

I'd say that right when he meets Nola, I was really into the film all the way.

I found it boring, frankly. Not in the way that it made me want to sleep, but just in the way that I did not care much about what happened on-screen. All the class diversion stuff and all...we've seen it before, we've seen it in better.

There still some good scenes there (the restaurant, hehe) and one very well-shot dialogue between Nola and Chris, in that café. Nice cinematography and great screenwriting there.

But other than that, I thought the first half was just dull. Once Chris begins to plan the murder it rises big time. The suspense is great as is the way Allen uses opera music in order to create suspense.

And that ending with the ring...

He was really reminding me of Ewan McGregor (in a good way)...

I saw this last night in Singapore, and I am still emotionally attached to go and see this again.

Despite the presence of two minor plotholes that have been discussed already, it was deeply touching film.

A

They could've easily cut about 20min and it would've made the first half MUCH better. It had plenty of dull moments in the first half, there was scenes that werent really necessary. Second half was oscar worthy no doubt about it, it was just such a turn around. To me it's more important to have a better final act then first, so I enjoyed the movie much more then I disliked it, it could've been like you said an easy A if the begining wasnt so dull.

Heh, aint that the truth. Doesnt seem like she can handle emotionally driven roles so well, she was all over the place. She's much better in more subtle type roles where the emotion doesnt have to just spew out of her, like Lost in Translation and In Good Company.