Genres

Visitors Review

2012-05-26 00:06:49

a waste of time

This review is from: Mother Night [VHS] (VHS Tape) I do not care for Nick Notle, and this movie is not recommended. John Goodman appears as an opertive for a government agency. His performance is fair.

Patessi 2012-05-25 05:59:05

Great book into a great movie!

The movie is a bit "thin" after reading the book, but it's still one ofthegreatest movies ever made. Sheryl Lee is beautiful and Nick Nolte isreally"vonneguty". He makes great job expressing the feelings from the book tothefilm. Not many films engage the feeling of the book as well as MotherNightdoes.

DeeDee-10 2012-05-16 03:07:49

Bravo!

After viewing this film I tried to put my finger on what I truly appreciatedabout it and found its RESTRAINT to be what captivated me the most. Nolte,not noted for restraint, was amazing in his role as Campbell. Hisbewilderment, resignation and acceptance of his situation came through withwell-crafted acting. The love scenes were remarkably tender. Nolte'sresponses to the surprises and twists fit the character perfectly. Watch forVonnegut's cameo!

2012-05-15 13:25:26

One of the Best Adpatations Of A Novel To A Film

This review is from: Mother Night (DVD) "Mother NIght" in not one of my favorite Vonnegut novels, but the film adaptation is superb. This is one of the best adaptations I've ever seen from page to screen, and extremely thought provoking. I give it my highest recommendation.

Spectator 2012-05-13 18:30:14

A beautifully rendered movie, a credit to its star

Seldom do I see a movie in which the star performs so well you can hardlybelieve he is an actor, but he comes across as the real guy he isportraying. I believed Nick Nolte was an American spy who seemed torenouncehis American citizenship in World War II--when in fact he should have beenrewarded for having served America so well after the war was over and hereturned to civilian life. I have seen Nick Nolte in other movies, butneverhave I been so impressed with his depth of characterization as he manifestsin this film.

2012-05-13 07:09:02

It Doesn't Suck!

I was skeptical about this movie. Movies based on novels are almost always severely lacking or they mess up the whole theme making it suitable for hollywood. Mother Night is not one of those movies. It follows the book pretty closely and uses the medium of film to take it a step further. I'd still recommend reading the book by Kurt Vonnegut, but this movie won't disappoint.

2012-05-05 04:51:04

The best book adaptation.

So far there have been three movies made from Kurt Vonnegut works. "Slaughtehouse Five", "Mother Night", and "Harrison Burgeron." "Harrison Burgeron" was really an amalgam of numerous Vonnegut themes and ideas, but based on the very short story of the same name. "Slaughterhouse Five" required that you read the book to get a full appreciation of the story in the film. "Mother Night" followed the book by the same title with precision, clarity and intensity.Wonderfully cast and acted, this is a dark tale of cause and effect on people's lives. To paraphrase the moral of the book "be careful what you pretend to be."Nolte is perfect as the lead with surprising and excellent roles by Arkin, Sheryl Lee, and John Goodman. If you are a Vonnegut fan you will not be disappointed with this interpretation of his book.

szigma 2012-05-04 20:58:39

Vonnegut on film. It is true!

A really good movie! Nice, if you just want to enjoy watching TV, nice ifyou are in the mood for some serious thinking. This is entertainment andyetthis is art!Kurt Vonnegut put on the big screen! Need I say anythingelse?I've read the book and believe me: this is the best adaption of any bookever!Congratulations, Mr. Nolte! There should have been an Oscar in thatacting!

manuel-pestalozzi 2012-05-03 18:07:29

Did I miss something?

I am amazed at the amount of praise that is heaped on this movie byother commentators. To me it was rather a disappointment, especiallythe combination of historical facts, fantasy and the main character'sinternal turmoil does not work at all (in Vonnegut's bookSlaughterhouse Five and even in George Roy Hill's adaptation for thescreen it does). Credibility is often overstretched. Too many questionsare left open. Did I miss some central points? Or did I fail to spotthe lines that supposedly connect the dots? A boy called Campbell, Jr., grows up in upstate New York. At home hisfather has many technical trade papers and one book. It has photographsof heaps of dead bodies in it. The boy leafs through the book, his daddoesn't like his doing that. What should this tell me? The family movesaway from upstate New York to Berlin. BANG. It is 1938, the boy is amarried man in Berlin and a theater playwright. What kind of plays doeshe write? In what language? Is he successful? His wife is an actressand looks glamorous. The parents move back to the USA and invite theirson to do the same. He does not. Why? Because having grown up inGermany he feels more German than American? Because he is successful?Because his wife is? Because he likes his life there? Because he likesthe Nazis? Because he is just plain lazy and doesn't like change? Don'task me.Possibly, the man just does not care, is not interested in politics, isa kind of an existentialist. He states that he is deeply in love withhis wife. He speaks of his Republic of Two (meaning he and his wife).There is little to no evidence proving his love for his wife in themovie, it much more seems a Republic of One.On the request of an American agent Campbell, Jr., agrees to broadcastanti Semitic Nazi hate propaganda to American listeners as a device fortransmitting encrypted messages to American authorities who readbetween the lines. The crucial meeting with the agent on a Berlin parkbench is short, unexciting and anti climactic, the decision to playalong comes pretty easily with no explanation, the rise up tobroadcaster seems to be uneventful and apparently fast.So now we have Campbell, Jr., presenting himself over the air as theLast Free American. The scheme for transmitting secret messages isfairly realistic and exciting - although one wonders what happened whenCampbell, Jr., really and honestly had to cough, hiccup etc. (must havescrambled the messages terribly). Anyway, the Nazis lose, the wife dies(touring in the Crimean for German troops - I never heard such toursreally happened on German front lines in WW II), Campbell, Jr., says hegoes to the Russian front but does not go, is captured by an Americansoldier who recognizes his mug (how come?), is dragged to asight-seeing tour in Auschwitz, is then released and resettled with thehelp of the Crucial Agent somewhere in the City of New York.AND THIS IS WHERE THE STORY REALLY STARTS BANG. From now on it is like a short story by Paul Auster. It is 1961,Campbell, Jr., lives in New York tenement as a has-been and mourns theloss of his wife. Nobody really cares - or do they? Yes, somehow theydo, and his neighbors offer some sort of distraction. Auschwitzsurvivors. A painter. Some American supremacists „discover" him andwant him to be their figurehead. They even find his presumed dead wifefor him, or is she his wife? Anyway, in the end Campbell, Jr., calls inat the Israeli consulate, and they obligingly give him the Big WarCriminal treatment, placing him in the cell adjacent to AdolfEichmann's. He writes his life story and, once this task finished,hangs himself on the typewriter's ribbons without getting sooty theleast bit.While I can see that there must be an issue of guilt and of loss, Ijust had the impression that the main character is a person who at alltimes is pretty indifferent to everything and hardly capable of lovefor anyone. So I found it difficult to sympathize for this looser whomourns his loss. Amazingly, many reviewers focus on his status as apotential war hero, having put his reputation at stake for playing theLast Free American. I assume according to them this took a lot ofcourage. As a matter of fact, however, the movie suggests that byaccepting the assignment Campbell created for himself a win-winsituation, as he would have been politically on the safe side no matterwho had won the war. The danger of his being uncovered never comes upduring the first part of the story.One might argue, that the whole story is a dreamlike fantasy and thatnobody should bother with historical accuracy or a logical developmentof the story which explains everything. But even then it fails to makea point, primarily, I suspect, because the love affair in the Republicof Two falls completely flat. This is a pity, especially if youconsider that the wife was played by Sheryl Lee, a talented, versatileand sensuous actress. She has much too little screen time and is forcedto use a ridiculous German accent. Another somehow neglected aspect arethe different texts (confession, broadcast and hidden messages), but Iguess this is largely unfilmable. Maybe I should give the book achance.

bill ferrell 2012-05-03 09:36:33

A Great film version of a great novel!

The folk who produced this masterful film have done fine service to anovelthat stands as perhaps the best fiction work centering upon human guiltandhuman responsibility ever published. Nolte takes the role of Howard W.Campbell, Jr., and makes it his own, remaining true to Vonnegut'sdepictionof a man who has lost ALL (to and) for Love.No weaknesses in this fine adaptation.

heywood100 2012-04-27 14:53:58

Sometimes oversentimental, but overall very good

I haven't yet read the Kurt Vonnegut book this was adapted from, but I amfamiliar with some of his other work and was interested to see how it wouldbe translated to the screen. Overall, I think this is a very successfuladaptation of one of Vonnegut's novels. It concerns the story of an Americanliving in Germany who is recruited as a spy for the US. His job is toingratiate himself with high ranked Nazi's and send secret messages to theAmerican's via his weekly radio show. But when the war ends he is denouncedas a war criminal but escapes to New York, where various odd plot twistsawait.If Mother Night has a problem it's that it tends to get a little toosentimental at times. But for most of the film the schmaltz is kept to aminimum and the very strange plot is carried through with skill and aplomb.And there are some fabulous moments of black comedy involving three rightwing Christian fundamentalists and a very highly ranked Nazi in a prisoncell. Very much recommended.

fred-houpt 2012-04-26 22:30:40

Nolte is a treasure

I have yet to see a film with Nolte in it that I did not like. However,this being said, he's made a lot of films and I've seen just a few. Inmy minds eye I am keeping the images of his performance here and theone in "The Thin Red Line". Nolte has a a full range of acting talents.When it's necessary to shout he roars like a wounded lion. His bestmoments are the ones I treasure in actors: when he just emotes throughfacial, hand and body gestures, without saying anything. Having come tothe conclusion that our present generation of actors, by and large,have no appreciation of what an actor can do without speaking, havingno conscious appreciation of the mastery of Keaton and Chaplin, thisgeneration of actors relies far too much on the mechanical wizardry ofcomputers. Of course it is also just a sign of the times we live in.Had Chaplin lived in our times....who knows, he just might as well havebecome an aficionado of CGI tools.I have not read the Vonnegut novel from which this film comes to thescreen. However, the plot is not so far fetched or convoluted that wecannot follow the path laid, even with all its surprises. Of course onthe outset it appears preposterous. However, it is also not impossible.Consider these for starters: A Spy at the Heart of the Third Reich: HeExtraordinary Life of Fritz Kolbe, America's Most Important Spy inWorld War II by Delattre and Prichard (look at Amazon for moredetails). Consider: History Undercover: Piercing the Reich: AmericanSpies Inside Nazi Germany DVD (I saw this here:http://store.aetv.com/html/product/index.jhtml?id=75054) seems to be aHistory Channel production.So, is the story ridiculous? Far fetched yes, impossible, no. Back tothe plot. Nolte's character is recruited and accepts an impossiblydangerous mission and unfortunately the script does not give us anadequate reason why he accepts. Was it a type of passivity, that he gotsucked into this role as it says because it was the best story he hadever written and he got to play the part? That's a hard thing toimagine any of us would grasp. But, it was an unusual time and peopledid extraordinary things.The acting throughout the film by the entire cast is excellent and aspeople have pointed out Alan Arkin, always fantastic, is very good in asmall role.I was really shocked by the ending of the film (no - I won't spoil it)and it made me feel terrible about the choice. Did this person feelthat the road was finally over and that he had spoken all that wasnecessary and that any more would be chapters added to a life alreadyfilled with many burnt pages? Hard to say but it really jolts.Nolte gives one of the finest performances you can expect....thepremises of the film make you wonder about a lot of things. It's veryentertaining and provoking. What great movies should be. A bit long butworth it. By the way, the movie music has selections from one of thebest living composers: Arvo Part.

Yo Yo Ma 2012-04-20 14:26:23

Read the book

Have yet to see the movie; the book is pure genius. Read all of Vonnegut's works. Truly a great author. He will be missed.

2012-04-19 18:37:58

Great Book, Great Film

Mother Night is an amazing read by Kurt Vonnegut, but I have come to expect that from him. What suprised me was the great film adaptation I found! Nick Nolte captures the essence of Howard W. Campbell Jr. just as I had imagined it. All the actors and actresses are wonderful, the setting tremendous, and the plot was straight on. An overall great movie.

hl123mthd 2012-04-15 02:30:36

Same plot, but a whole different mood from the novel.

I am a huge fan of Vonnegut's work and I'm very fond of this movie, butI wouldn't say that this is a film of the "Mother Night" that I read.When people say that Vonnegut is unfilmable, two things come to mymind. One is that many of his themes are very near the knuckle or eventaboo, despite the accusation sometimes used against him that hechooses relatively "easy" targets for his satire. This means less everyday that passes as far as filmability is concerned. Directors thesedays appear to revel in breaking taboos and I have high hopes for theversion of "Bluebeard" now in production. Amazing to think that aninnocent piece like Vonnegut's "Sirens of Titan" would probably havebeen the equivalent of "R" rated if filmed when it was published backin the 50s, for its violence, language and sexual and thematic content,though it's a tragedy that nobody's come up yet with a filmable scriptfor it. And in the present economic climate, I also hope some directorout there is looking closely at "Jailbird", "Galapagos" and "HocusPocus".The other thing is his narrative style, heaping irony upon irony uponirony but still making it hilariously funny. It seems impossible toobjectify, and that appears to be the biggest obstacle to making greatfilms of his great novels, because the little authorial comments thatcolour our response as readers are just not possible in movies withoutresorting to too often clumsy techniques like "talkovers". Vonnegutsuggested that there was a character missing from filmed versions ofhis work, himself as author/narrator. To its credit, "Breakfast ofChampions" (the movie) tried to keep the comedy and came a bit of acropper for its pains. As did another turkey made from a Vonnegutnovel, "Slapstick" in an even more spectacular way.Still, there's nothing wrong with a director giving us his subjectiveinterpretation of Vonnegut, and "Mother Night" is an excellent exampleof how, as another reviewer put it, a good director can add a visualpoetry to a source like this. But so much of the humour is lost thatthough it's the same plot, it's not really from the same novel I read.If it had been, I'd probably have been rolling in the aisles laughing afew times watching it. For a reader of the novel, I think a chuckleeven at the end is forgivable. The end of the film, however, is trulypoignant, and I think one of the film's successes is that it cangenuinely leave you feeling that you've watched someone walk a razor'sedge between good and evil, and the jury is still out.Standing alone and of itself it's well worth a look. Technically thereare some minor but glaring errors, notably in continuity, and it toooften looks drab and theatrical, but most of the time it hits anacceptable note and occasionally shows considerable imagination andresourcefulness. The acting in general is of a high order, even ifmaybe the dialogue is by today's standards a little stilted.It survives quite well watching back to back with "Slaughterhouse-5",and there is actually quite a bit more "good" filmed Vonnegut outthere, mostly versions of his short stories - "Harrison Bergeron", "WhoAm I This Time?" and some other things like, of course, the misfiringfilmed version of his very funny but disposable play, "Happy BirthdayWanda June". Also there was an interesting piece , if it still exists,done in the 70s called "Between Time And Timbuktu" which Vonnegutapparently didn't like much, although he was involved in itsproduction, because he felt it misinterpreted him in its generality. Hesaid it reminded him of the bizarre surgical experiments performed inthe HG Wells tale "The Island of Dr. Moreau", but it did for manypeople serve as an excellent introduction to his work.But if the films don't make you want to go to the superior sourcematerial, they're not doing their job.As the man said, more or less, the big show is inside your head.

Tim 2012-04-14 09:28:41

Dark but fascinating

Nick Nolte gives an excellent performance in Kurt Vonnegut's dark tale.Notle plays Howard W. Campbell who was a double agent working inpropagandaduring World War II. After the war, he lives anonymously until competingfactions wish to dig up his past. As with much of Vonnegut's work, thisis ameditation on the absurdity of war and those who use propaganda for theirown aims. Nolte is fantastic - self assured and confident as the youngerCampbell, and then broken and haunted as the older man who is forced toatone for the sins of his past. (7 out of 10)

gcemc 2012-04-11 15:22:33

Haunting story, superb acting

I felt drawn into the world of the manipulation of mind and will at theheart of the story. The acting by Nolte, Lee, Arkin and the supportingcast was superb. The strange twists in the Vonnegut story are made strangerby odd details.

the coyote 2012-04-11 03:01:34

The only perfect book to film adaptation

Mother Night is one of my favorite novels and going to see this I wasexpecting a huge disappointment. Instead I got a film that perfectlyportrays the irony, humor, elequence, and above all else the crushingsadness of Vonnegut's novel.This is certainly Nolte's best preformance to date. He captures the defeatand selfloathing of Howard Cambell Jr. consistently from the subtleintonations of his speech to the held back tears behind his eyes.Alan Arkin is absolutly hilarious as George Kraft. Sherryl Lee is hauntingin her detachment from reality as Cambell's young lover. John Goodman isunderstated and more than effective as Cambell's "Blue FairyGodmother."This Pinnocioesque story of Cambell trying to be his own ideal hero andunwittingly becoming his ideal tragic villian is a mature and vivid lookinto what we are as people. And aside from that, it is one of the mostdeeply romantic films I have ever come across. Cambell is the incarnationof both foolish and wise love. And at the films sastifyingly painfulconclusion, he finally learns what it means to be a real boy as his BlueFairy Godmother grants him his wish. And he realizes that...well, watchthemovie and you'll see.Mother Night is without a doubt in my mind one of the best films ever made.It is a beautiful poetic story that digs deep within our emotions and iscompletely faithful to its original author.

Jakeroo 2012-04-09 07:02:36

Movie just like Vonnegut's novels.

It leaves you with a feeling of "Is that the way it's going to end?" Someof it is so implausible and illogical, such as the business of Russian spiestrying to get Howard away from the Israelis or that Resi would be a Russianspy trying to kidnap him. It didn't work for me. Sheryl Lee, however, madeit worthwhile - a vision of loveliness in her nude scene, much as she was inBLISS.

2012-04-08 12:40:20

Beneath the Night

We are what we pretend to be to everyone but ourselves, aren't we? That is one of the recurring themes in the film adaptation of Kurt Vonnegut's novel Mother Night. This film pushes at a person's psyche, causing one to think on several different levels. The underlying themes are what make the major impact in this film and can be applied to anything as well as the themes' cloak, World War II. Armed with Vonnegut's caustic humour and subtle irony, the filmmakers created a weave of themes for the watcher to unravel; themes ranging from a person's existence to ignorance.The movie's opening sequence is enough to reveal to the watcher that this movie will be rife with ironic occurrences. The sequence begins with a black and white depiction of the Israeli flag while Bing Crosby's "White Christmas" plays over the scene of guards escorting an elderly Howard W. Campbell to his cell. There he is instructed to write his memoirs.We are taken back to when Campbell was an American child in Germany, and from that point he grows into a promising playwright. He become a sort of golden boy in the German stage circuit. He is later recruited into the American spy world and becomes one of America`s most effective agents. Each week, Campbell broadcasts a fiery speech about Nazi ideals. These speeches are heard throughout the world, causing most people to hate Howard W. Campbell, Jr., while the Nazis idolize him.The catch with Campbell's speeches where the coded messages inside of the words. Campbell would write his speech then send it to his "editors". These people would then send it back with notes on when to pause, cough, clear his throat, and other such gestures. These breaks where relayed over the radios and to America, where someone interpreted the signals. Here is where Campbell`s dilemmas begin and here is where the themes of this movie are introduced. "You are what you pretend to be" is the most significant of these themes. We are what other people believe us to be. With the exception of four people, Campbell included, no one knew that Campbell was actually a spy relaying messages to the Americans. In his eyes, Howard W. Campbell, Jr., was a good man. To the rest of the world, Howard W. Campbell, Jr., was a good nazi. His weekly speeches stirred the passions of German citizens. The speeches struck the citizens' emotions, causing the people to stand stronger and fight longer for their worthy cause.I found another theme inside of this film, one that struck me as most disturbing. The theme of the danger of ignorance. When Campbell is in Germany, there is true, unabashed hatred for those who were not German. Nazis actually hunted down these people and murdered them, because the Nazis just knew that those people where the scum of the earth. Later on when Campbell is living in New York City and the white supremacists find his address, they offer what most people write off as simple comic relief. The dentist turned reverend studied the jaw lines of paintings of Jesus. His conclusion was that Jesus was not a Jew because he had no Jewish jaw line. The reverend wrote a book on just that subject. The willing death of Mr. Krapptaur at the feet of Campbell, his idol, was strange and sudden. These actions seemed to be much more than a simple farce to me. It was like some twilight zone. The actions made me wonder if those men actually understood the consequences of what they were doing. Those men should have been taken to the death camps to see with their own eyes what their immature hatred was capable of destroying. Would they then bow before Howard W. Campbell, Jr.?So the circle of the movie goes on, the plot running into and over itself, weaving over holes and through history. Themes that apply to a world now as well as a world when Vonnegut concocted this novel, and themes that will always apply to this unending circle of history. The difference between how you see yourself and how others see you is outlined in this film as well as the factor ignorance plays in our lives. Mother Night is a movie for someone who appreciates irony, and it is a movie for someone who is not afraid to be confronted with the truth that you are what you pretend to be.