The Man Who Cried (2000) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
118 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Terrific and moving, now and then, but it never coheres, and it only poses as sincerity
secondtake16 July 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The Man Who Cried (2000)

On paper, this looks unstoppable: in the 1920s, a Russian Jewish family is torn by war and poverty into pieces, the father leaving his little girl behind as he seeks a better life in America. This is the story of the girl, who flees, with some luck, to England, and then as a young woman to Paris, seemingly in search of her father. But she is delayed there long enough to be involved in an acting troupe, falls in love with a gypsy horseman, watches Paris fall to the Nazis, and escapes to America, at last, to find her father.

How in the world could this go wrong? There are even three truly stellar actors in lead roles: Cate Blanchett (as a Russian expatriate dancer in Paris), Johnny Depp (the Gypsy, of course), and John Turturro (an Italian opera singer, well done!). And the photography, by French cinematographer Sacha Vierny in her last film, and the production design, by Carlos Conte, who worked on Kite Runner and Motorcycle Diaries, among recent films, are terrific, almost self-sustaining.

But somehow it is slow going stuff. It isn't lyrical, some voyage through disaster and beauty, and it even avoids sympathy for many of the characters, who naturally fall to one fate or another in this topsy turvy environment. Partly it's the script--there is little said, and very little said of interest, probing or fascinating or moving. And it's been said before, of course--the story, taken in its broadest sense, is that familiar terrible story that needs retelling, but with greater intensity and respect. Again, it looks good on paper.

So, director Sally Potter is in charge here, and she wrote it, too. I really liked the surprise and invention of Orlando, which she directed, but that, too, was flawed, and it's probably her best film. The rest of her resume, that I've seen or heard about, is paltry stuff. So watch this knowing it has the chops, the goods, and the best of intentions, but it will only feel amazing in small parts, which never quite get rolling into a meaningful whole, including the calculated and inevitable tear-jerking end.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Strong cast in tolerable historical drama-romance
Quebec_Dragon9 May 2011
First of all, try to avoid the trailer before watching the movie if you can. The Man Who Cried is about a young Jewish girl living in Russia in the late twenties who has to flee her home country and eventually ends up in Paris as a young adult just before the onset of World War II. She gets involved with a cabaret showgirl played by Cate Blanchett, an Italian opera singer played by John Turturro and a gypsy man played by Johnny Depp. I found the movie slow-moving but not boring. It had a certain melancholy to it where almost everything was restrained and understated. There are dramatic moments but no big melodrama which honestly I kinda missed. I wasn't particularly touched nor did I cry or even get teary-eyed. Your own mileage might vary, but I don't think it's a big tear-jerker.

There's a lot of music (mostly opera but not usually the bombastic cliché kind) in this film with two important recurring songs. They're quite beautiful especially the french song "Je crois entendre encore" which weirdly I didn't recognize as French despite it being my native language. The songs are important because they often convey the emotions felt instead of words. It doesn't really matter that you don't understand the words. As an historical drama, it mostly skirts big events, mostly focusing on their effects on our characters from different nationalities. You need some minimal historical background to get what is happening. The whole first part with the exile of the little girl was pretty gripping. She seemed so small and vulnerable. The romantic aspect was two-fold. The relationship between Cate Blanchett and John Turturro's characters was very interesting but not romantic. The relationship between Christina Ricci and Johnny Depp's characters was less interesting but more romantic.

Johnny Depp doesn't say much but his presence is felt. He was born to play sexy gypsy men and I suspect most women will "swoon" over him ;) The other performances were fine with the stand-out being Cate Blanchett as a somewhat superficial Russian dancer trying to marry into richness. The songs were mostly lip-synched. I think they were done very well but still it disturbed somewhat my suspension of disbelief. In conclusion, I liked watching it, it was well made with strong actors but the story could have been told a little better to engage the viewer more emotionally. It didn't strike me as particularly memorable or as the highlight of any of these actor's resumes.

Rating: 6.5 out of 10 (good)
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Grand ambition
SnoopyStyle7 September 2013
Suzie (Christina Ricci) is a Russian Jew whose village was burnt down. Her father had emigrated to America. Her mother was killed, and somehow she managed to escape to Britain as a child. As an adult, she tries to go to America to search for her father. But all she could do was go to Paris as a singer and dancer on the eve of WWII.

Writer/Director Sally Potter has grand ambitions for this movie. Christina Ricci is lovely as a pensive girl searching for her past. Johnny Depp is almost a mute in this. Cate Blanchett and John Turturro are both trying out distracting accents. The scale of this movie (both emotional and physical) just never matched its ambitions. And the ending just didn't have the required tension or pace. Like the rest of the movie, it just couldn't achieve the wished-for climax.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Grade: B-
tideprince15 January 2005
Christina Ricci sings more than she speaks in the movie, but she manages to hold your attention nevertheless for a pretty solid hour and a half in this well-acted and profound, but uneven period piece. Sally Potter, who also directed the similarly problematic "Orlando", clearly has the visual and thematic talent to be a much better respected director than she is - she just needs to learn how to tell a story.

The first forty minutes of the film, which begins in the year 1927, are absolutely masterful. The sublime Claudia Lander-Duke plays young Fegele, an impoverished Russian-Jewish girl whose beloved father decides to journey to America in search of a better life. After that, Fegele and her family are set upon by unnamed bad guys (probably either Cossacks or Communists), and Fegele is separated from them. She ends up on an ocean liner bound for England, where her name is changed to Susan, she is adopted by an English family that doesn't understand her, and she is forced to begin the process of assimilation.

Flash forward ten years or so (Potter is regrettably and consistently unspecific about such things). Fegele (now Suzie and now played by Christina Ricci, she of the large, expressive eyes) wants to be a showgirl so she can earn money to go to America and find her father. She auditions and is accepted by a group based out of Paris. Once in Paris, she rooms and becomes tight with fellow showgirl Lola (Cate Blanchett), a somewhat vapid and materialistic creature with no ambition save that of landing a rich man - which she manages to do in the form of opera singer and Mussolini supporter Dante Dominio (John Turturro, in one of his better performances). Around the same time, Suzie meets and falls in love with Cesare (Johnny Depp), the leader of a band of gypsies.

Once all the dominoes are in place, Potter wastes no time in knocking them down. You can see trouble coming a mile away: Lola, Suzie's one confidant who is aware of her Jewish ancestry, begins falling under the emotional and political spell of anti-Semitic, gypsy-hating fascist Dante. Meanwhile, the Nazis have invaded Poland and, despite everyone's self-assured predictions that they'll stop there, the French border is neither geographically nor historically distant. Suddenly, it's a race against time for all involved, but especially for Suzie - will she stay behind with her gypsy king, or, given a choice, will she escape certain death? The problem with all of this is that it's all so familiar. Potter adds nothing to the old story. There are some wonderful messages in this film about multiculturalism, nationalism, and the sometimes subtle nature of fascism, but if you don't care about the story you're not going to be interested in listening to the messages. The gypsy subplot, for instance, seems tacked on, like it was an excuse to give Ricci a love interest and have him be played by Johnny Depp.

The really interesting plot line here involves Lola and Dante, and I would pay ten dollars to see a movie that was just about them. Both Blanchett and Turturro create real, flesh-and-blood human beings, and it's in their scenes that Potter's writing really soars. Watching Dante sink deeper and deeper into a political philosophy fueled by his own insecurity while the irrepressibly optimistic Lola tries to turn a blind eye to it all is a fascinating and marvelous experience.

Ricci gives a good performance too, although occasionally that Valley Girl tone she uses in most of the rest of her movies slips out a little too much here and there. Fortunately, Potter doesn't give the shy, quiet Suzie very much to say. Most of her acting is done with her eyes, and she's really quite good. Johnny Depp does what he can with Cesare, but there's only so much an actor can accomplish when playing a plot device.

Art direction, music, and cinematography were all top-drawer. As is par for the course with Sally Potter's films, it looked good and had some interesting things to say. I just wish it had been more compelling.
72 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Elegant, sumptuous, but very flawed
LouE1531 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Sally Potter is a director in love with beauty, and at her best she makes devotees of her viewers. She'll be remembered for "Orlando", starring the marvellous Tilda Swinton – but still, "The Man Who Cried" has moments of beauty and flashes of brilliance that make it well worth a look. It's messy, patchy, but has intense visual presence, and some memorable scenes.

The casting shows clout for an art-house director – Christina Ricci, Cate Blanchett, Johnny Depp, John Turturro, and so on. But greatest praise goes to Oleg Yankovsky as Ricci's father, and the luminous Claudia Lander-Duke, playing his daughter as a child, cast adrift in the world, yet with a stately inscrutability quite beyond her years.

The visual tone is sumptuous, well matched by music which doesn't simply exist outside of the film, but is woven into its very texture. Potter is on surest ground in the worlds of music, dance, theatre, with vivid imagery and impressive tableaux. Her dialogue: not so great. Thankfully Ricci's Susie is more likely to sing than to talk: she is our ears and eyes in a journey through an unsafe, lonely world of the 30s and 40s, and her remarkable face speaks eloquently of sadness and ennui, loss and damage. Depp reprises his now patented gypsy/pirate/outcast role, sidelined as a character, but adding much needed sex appeal. He becomes just another adventure for Susie, emerging and receding from the gloom in a slow dance - but elegant and handsome, like the film.

I'll not forget the scenes of a man dancing in a Parisian café; or Ricci singing, dirge-like, on a doomed liner. I'd like to forget Depp at the climax of his romantic brush with Ricci, riding pointless circles around her on a white horse in slow motion, like something out of a 1980s Kate Bush video.

Not one of the greats; but with glimpses of something altogether better. Still, I'd rather see an odd, flawed gem, than a ploddingly efficient, unoriginal work, showing little imagination or passion.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
My father's picture
jotix10014 July 2005
Sally Potter's "The Man who Cried" turned up recently on cable. Not having seen it, and based on previous work by Ms. Potter and the cast, we decided to take a look. The film is beautiful to look at. The fabulous cinematography by Sacha Vierny serves the movie well. Also, there is great singing heard of operas by Bizet, Puccini, Verdi and Purcell.

The film is the saga of a little Russian girl in the search for her father who has gone to America in search of a better life and eventually, to send away for the ones left behind to share a life in a land of promise. It will take the whole film to have father and daughter reunited once again.

Christina Ricci is, in our humble opinion, sadly miscast in the film. By having her sing, Ms. Potter makes a blunder, because Ms. Ricci can't carry a tune. Why not have her lip-sync like Mr. Turturro does whenever he is seen in an opera, or belting a Neapolitan song for his friends? Ms. Ricci, a good actress, otherwise, is not as effective here as in other films.

Cate Blanchett fares much better with her Russian Lola. Ms. Blanchett makes a great contribution to the film, and she makes Ms. Ricci pale, in comparison. Ms. Blanchett gives a fantastic performance in the film. John Turturro is also excellent in the movie. His Dante Dominio, a famous tenor with a golden voice is a Fascist and a bigot.

Johnny Depp, who plays the gypsy Cesar, is another actor that doesn't live up to his potential. The only thing we can think it must have been Ms. Potter's direction, because Mr. Depp is a great actor who is usually effective in whatever role he plays. Also, we wonder why did Ms. Potter insist in having Cesar and his horse in all the operas one sees staged. The romance between Suzie and Cesar doesn't seem to work out.

"The Man who Cried" is a valiant attempt by Ms. Potter to present this multi layered story in a good way. Her excesses seem to work against her.
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Ravishing!
=G=28 February 2002
The beauty of the "The Man Who Cried" is not as much in the story as it is in the telling. Potter conjures up another masterpiece of sumptuous elegance in this Europic which tells of a young Jewish woman's quest to find her long estranged father in the years prior to WWII. The film features a cosmopolitan cast with sterling performances from Turturro and Blanchett set against rich period backdrops rendered in exquisite beauty and detail. A visual feast for the jaded.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
The Man Who Liked Horses, but Not Plots
brighteyedpoem16 May 2005
I am hesitant to give any film with Johnny Depp lower than a five. Yet I'm pretty sure that Johnny Depp wasn't actually in the movie. Rather, it was a cardboard cutout of Johnny Depp, brooding, with his shirt half open. Other things were mysteriously lacking in this film, such as an ending...and a middle...and character development. Well, there was that moment that Johnny Depp cried. I found myself waiting after the credits for more plot development. And did ANYONE notice that Christina Ricci cannot sing? At all? Though that little girl singing Dido's Lament was probably the best moment in the film. In conclusion, Johnny Depp likes horses.
38 out of 66 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
an excellent director delivers a good movie: support both!
kikiricky18 March 2001
Although I agree with those who say that Sally Potter's THE MAN WHO CRIED doesn't entirely live up to her two previous works, I think that even so it is still a very good movie.

Apparently things are slowly starting to get better for THE MAN WHO CRIED. At least it has now been played in several countries in Europe other than Italy (like England, Germany and France) and its score and screenplay are finally being sold by Amazon.co.uk. (I'm hoping the VHS and DVD will soon be available also.) I want to contribute to this movie's current rebirth by saying what I think makes it special and definitely worth seeing.

The first thing that comes to my mind about THE MAN WHO CRIED is its formal visual beauty. It is extremely well directed and there are many scenes that I regard to be among the most beautiful ever filmed. Ms. Potter's talent as a film director is undeniable: her style is a mixture of choreographic elegance and subtle sensuality. I have never seen the camera move like it does in her pictures. In ORLANDO and in THE MAN WHO CRIED alike, it has a way of chasing the characters on scene, of playing with them, of circling around them, that makes it seem like an animated being rather than a mechanical object. It literally seems as if the camera dances with the characters it portrays! None of the movies by other directors I've seen so far are 'written' in this same 'language.' Ms. Potter's personal contribution to the renewal of the existing 'cinematographic grammar' shouldn't be underestimated.

A second striking quality of THE MAN WHO CRIED is the music in it. The director said that 'The intention was to find a way of telling the story where music was carrying emotional and spiritual truth with as much force as the images and the characters.' By frequently reiterating a set of intensely powerful, culturally eloquent and evocative pieces – among others, Purcell's Dido's Lament, Bizet's Je Crois Entendre Encore and instrumental pieces by Goliov – which serve to remind the characters who they are and where they come from (besides giving the movie cohesion), she succeeds in this difficult task brilliantly. (And courageously: not many film directors, I believe, would dare to make a movie with four opera pieces constantly being sung!) The idea that comes through is that when people are left without their cultural identity and/or dignity, music can save them for forgetting their 'Selves,' save them from silence and incommunicability.

As far as the characters in THE MAN WHO CRIED are concerned, I think they are very well thought out and effectively depicted. It is especially admirable that the director would decide to give life to a 'mute heroine,' Suzie-Fegele, who says almost nothing throughout the whole movie, but expresses herself surprisingly well in spite of this. She conveys, with incredible force, that sense of inadequateness and discomfort so many are left with for life when they are put into a hostile environment during their childhood. Cristina Ricci seems embarrassed at times, and rightly so, for in this movie she plays the part of an outcast, and that's the way an outcast often feels, unfortunately. But there's also strength in her eyes, and determination, and, once again, rightly so, for despite all that fate has unjustly taken away from her, she has learned to go on, to look straight ahead and not ever give in, to live and not to let herself die. Cate Blanchett is an exceptional actress and she performs wonderfully in this movie: both her beauty and intelligent eyes were never this intense and captivating. Johnny Depp is, as always, very talented and very handsome.

As I said at the beginning of my review, this movie isn't quite as good as ORLANDO and THE TANGO LESSON (which were, in my opinion, two absolute masterpieces). While those two movies were perfect from the very beginning to the very end, THE MAN WHO CRIED is perhaps a little uneven, in that along with many breathtaking and superb scenes there are a few instances in which something seems to be missing (overall I rate it 9/10). Also, I personally would have preferred for it to be as multilingual as it was multicultural (then again, I know this probably would have made the movie even less popular). Nonetheless I think THE MAN WHO CRIED has all the qualities of a good art product and I feel perhaps some haven't fully appreciated it because they weren't looking at it as one should look at 'poetry,' but rather as one normally looks at 'prose.' There's so much entailed in it, that needs to be interpreted, as with poetry. Sally Potter doesn't flaunt feelings, but they are there, and I guarantee they can stir you immensely if only you cooperate. Every minute of THE MAN WHO CRIED (which I have seen three times already) gave me something special to think about and remember, and movies don't do that to me very often. Consequently I think it would be a real pity for the public not to support this movie and its director. I think Sally Potter is one of the very best film makers around and I hope our support and enthusiasm will persuade her to do even better next time!
35 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The title had more intriguing story than the actual movie
margineanvladdaniel11 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
No disrespect, but I was more curious about what man was the story about because, the main character was his child, but it was pretty obvious. The actors played well, but the story was pretty common and predictable, easy solving, she could have skipped the drama and found him earlier, but that's the charm of it. It was good to see Turturro again, and not in a comedy movie, the others too, Johnny really looked like a gypsy. Peace & Love!

Iffsigdistsitditdiydoydoyydohdohdohdohfohdohdohdoyyfoydfohdohdohfkhdkhhfkhhdkhdkgdkhgd.jgxkgdogdoydoydogdogdoydoyxoydoydoyxoyfoycoycogckhclhclhclhhclyclhclhclhclhhclhhclhclhcohclhclhclhhhc.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Ah, What Could Have Been...
jhclues29 January 2002
Under the yoke of persecution, people-- collectively or individually-- will find a voice, a way to communicate their plight to the world, to anyone who will listen. Sometimes the whole world will hear that cry, but often it will fall on deaf ears. `The Man Who Cried,' written and directed by Sally Potter, is just such a story, of a people-- Jews-- unimaginably persecuted and attempting to find their voice, that common expression of their suffering and turmoil. And, as is wont to happen in extreme situations, that expression will manifest itself in terms that are universal and defy the barriers of language. The `Man' in this story can be found in hu-MAN-ity, and his cry can be found in the common expression of song: In the aria of the opera, in the songs of the gypsies camping on the outskirts of Paris, or in the a capella intonations of a young Russia girl, a Jew, exiled from her home and adrift, alone, in a world of incomprehensible confusion.

The story begins in Russia, 1927; a man (Oleg Yankovsky) is forced to flee the country for America, leaving behind his young daughter, for whom he hopes to send later, once he is settled. Very soon, however, the preadolescent girl is forced to leave, as well, and winds up alone in England, at a school, where she is given the name `Suzie,' and, being an outsider, suffers the taunts of her peers. And through it all, what keeps Suzie (Christina Ricci) going, is the thought that some day she will be able to join her father (from whom she has not heard since his departure from Russia) in America. In the meantime, Suzie finds solace in singing, while her personal odyssey eventually takes her to Paris (at a most inopportune time for a Jew), where she becomes involved with a dancer named Lola (Cate Blanchett), a renowned opera singer, Dante Dominio (John Turturro) and an enigmatic gypsy, Cesar (Johnny Depp). Now a young woman, Suzie's dreams of America have diminished somewhat, but as the Nazi war machine begins cutting a swath across Europe, her thoughts, with renewed fervor, yet mingled with doubt, turn again to the possibility of joining her father in America.

As with her previous effort, `Orlando,' in 1993, Sally Potter had a definite vision of how to approach and present her story. Unfortunately, she seems unable-- or unwilling-- to share that vision with her audience. The story itself is interesting, if not original, but her disjointed, abstract methods of presenting it make it too obscure to embrace. On the surface, what some may initially consider an imaginative rendering of the material dissolves under closer scrutiny, and the artistic, abstract presentation is revealed as nothing more nor less than the effects of awkward transitions that defeat the very vision Potter was attempting with this film. The `transitions,' in fact, which are so vital to the telling of the story, are actually not so much transitions as they are lurches or jumps, which dramatically distorts the flow of the film. Add to that the lack of character development or delineation, as well as Potter's inability to maintain any tension whatsoever, and the result is a film that is emotionally uninvolving and, at best, unapproachable from the standpoint of the audience. Visually, it has it's moments, especially in the silent exchanges between Suzie and Cesar, but they are simply too few and far between to sustain any interest. And it's unfortunate, because Potter had all the tools with which to work, but didn't know what to do with them.

The performances, too, suffer the same fate as the presentation of the film. Ricci looks stunning-- very reminiscent of a young Elizabeth Taylor, in fact-- and her performance is the highlight of the film; Suzie, at least, is believable. Ricci does well with the material she is given-- which isn't much-- and her lack of dialogue and extended moments of silence may mask, somewhat, the ambiguity of the character. She is wonderfully expressive, however, which at least adds a touch of mystery to Suzie, who because of Potter's lack of attention is not nearly as sympathetic a character as she should be. Ricci has developed a powerful screen presence, quite apparent though unemployed in this film, and hopefully in her next project she will have a director who knows how to use it.

Like Ricci, Cate Blanchett does the best she can with the material, but under Potter's unsteady hand Lola seems out of step with her environment, and despite Blanchett's best efforts comes across as more caricature than character. She certainly tried, however, and attempted to get more out of Lola than was humanly possible. A poorly written stereotype, there was nothing Blanchett could do to save herself, or the character, with this one.

John Turturro suffers the same fate, only more so. Without the necessary guidance, he seems to have a hard time immersing himself into Dante's skin. It's a good effort, but Turturro as Dante is like putting a square peg in a round hole; he just doesn't fit. And the singing voice provided for him defies credibility.

Depp, as well, seems at odds with his character, Cesar, though he suits the part of the silent, brooding gypsy quite well. Again, it's a case of being all dressed up with nowhere to go. The character was not so much poorly written as too ambiguous; to be effective (as he could and should have been), Cesar simply needed some direction, and it was not there.

The supporting cast includes Harry Dean Stanton (Perlman), Hana Maria Pravda (Grandmother) and Claudia Lander-Duke as young Suzie (the best bit of casting in the film; very credible as a young Ricci). The most positive thing that can be said of `The Man Who Cried' is that it had such potential. Alas, it was never tapped; and you're left with the thought of what could have been. I rate this one 4/10.
15 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
photographic emotions
butterflysphere28 August 2006
I found this DVD by accident in a little resale bookstore on Brand blvd in Glendale, Ca. I was shocked that I had never heard of it and purchased it for the $17.99 and took it home. Why I loved it: many people have complained about the pace, but that is one of my favorite aspects of the film. It moves like a sensual waltz. It has a beautiful pulse that grabs onto you and lets the well exuded emotions of the characters seep into your mind like old sepia photographs that you want to stare at for hours. It is raw and full of multi-layered subtext. I loved the story. There was no censoring or trying to look pretty or appropriate. John, Johnny, Cate and Christina, as well as Harry Dean Stanton and Oleg Yankovsky were all lost in this film and only the characters they played appeared on the screen. So believable and well acted. I have read several comments about the lack of lines for Cesar (Depp's character) and I do not understand that. He spoke so much without needing to speak out loud, besides, it was Susie's story. Amazing cinematography and art direction. The artistic craftiness that was transferred onto the screen in this movie reminded me of a short film called "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" (based on short story by Ambrose Bierce. I saw it in a film class in college and then went back to my dorm room and painted for hours while listening to Mozart's Requiem and drinking red wine. Every time I closed my eyes, I saw photographs of the movie in my mind. I love to be affected that way.
30 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Dreamy To Look At, But Then What?
Dan1863Sickles31 December 2006
Dreamy camera work, and a spirited performance by a luscious cast, aren't quite enough to save this confused and almost incoherent wartime melodrama about a romantic Jewish showgirl finding love and danger in Nazi occupied Paris.

Here is a fascinating example of how casting people can overlook the most basic physical facts about the actors. Christina Ricci and Cate Blanchett are both stunningly beautiful and breathtakingly gifted. But if you check your IMDb stats, you'll notice that Cate Blanchett is more than ten years older than Christina, and a good six inches taller.

What does this mean? Well, it means that when you see them together, Cate is obviously the one you'd pick as the big sister, the wise and protective mother figure. She towers over Christina like C3P0 standing next to R2D2. But in the story, Cate's character Lola is supposed to be a silly, empty-headed floozy while Christina's character Suzie is an intense, passionate, deeply determined young heroine. Neither actress is right in terms of age or appearance. Cate is too tall, too noble, too elegant and aristocratic a physical presence to be cast as a trashy, comically inept gold digger. And Christina Ricci is too tiny, too fresh-faced, and too physically undeveloped to be Cate's equal.

At the same time, film maker Sally Potter seems absolutely indifferent to the realism of the story, and the storytelling problems of pace, suspense, tension and credibility. While little Suzie drifts dreamily into an almost mystical affair with a hunky Gypsy, (Johnny Depp) the needy and greedy Lola clumsily ropes in a rich but comically cruel and stupid opera star. (John Turturro, the only major character who's perfectly cast in type and ability.) Problem is, Suzie's dreamy affair doesn't really seem that heroic. She doesn't help her Gypsy friends escape the Nazis. She doesn't even help the nice Jewish lady who lives downstairs. All she does is moon around looking serious and dreamy. She hates the anti-Semitism of the cowardly opera singer, but she doesn't really do anything to counter it. She doesn't even warn Lola not to marry the guy, or tell her she could find lots of better men.

The whole story would have worked much, much better if Cate Blanchett and Christina Ricci had been cast better according to size, age, looks and type. Cate should have been the rich, self-assured, and aristocratic wife of a Vichy French banker or politician. She hears Chrstina sing and is captivated by her waif-like looks and pure, child like voice. The two become friends, almost like sisters, but then Cate, who's good at heart but rather bored with her much older husband, starts up an affair with that stunning Gypsy lad. For her he's just a fun fling, but young Christina falls for him on a deeper level, wanting to help him save his people from the Nazis. When spoiled Cate finds out her little sister has stolen her man, she flies into a horrible jealous rage and tells the Nazis everything -- but at the last minute she comes to the rescue and dies nobly, allowing Christina and her Gypsy to escape to America on the last boat out of Marseilles.

Now THAT'S a movie!
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
To make a bad movie with such marvelous cast worths mentioning
striker-828 January 2002
First of all I must admit that when I first saw the movie coming I tought it would be a great one. Besides two of my favorite players, (Turturro & Blanchett) there were two decent players in the leading roles. Ricci and Depp.

But when the movie started, after 10-15 minutes I saw that one can make a very bad movie with such marvelous players. If we look at the whole movie, (by the way there is no such thing, the movie does not come together) the characters are like cartoons. Director gives us very shallow characters. In a movie which has no acceleration -like this one- there should be depth in the characters but the director completely forgets this.

And in particular my two favorite players are simply wasted, and Johnny Depp is like the company of the white horse, because except 2-3 scenes we see him with the horse. As if the main actor was the horse and Johnny was there to hold it!!!

There were many little details to mention about but the main thing is the movie does not make any sense.

The only good things to tell the truth was the music and the scene that gypsies began to play the song that Ricci sings.

For the last words: if you did not see it, you haven't missed anything!!! (especially if you like Turturro and Blanchett as much as I do)
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A character driven story with great acting, music and cinematography.
joshuastephen423 December 2001
My entire reason for bringing this film home was the cast: Christina Ricci, Cate Blanchett, John Turturro and Johnny Depp. Each of the actors are phenomenal and have talent in spades, and to see them all together in a film with such great characters was a delight. However, this is one of those movies where there is no fast-paced, witty dialog, no car chases and no gratuitous sex. It is about the characters. Therefore, many will find its plot slow and dull. This movie was not made for mass appeal. Many will find it to be beautiful and meaningful, while others will not sit through the first half hour. With that said, I will now say how much I loved this movie. It was visually stunning, superbly acted and has a score to match. While I have always enjoyed Christina Ricci and found her to be quite attractive, I have never seen her look as beautiful as she does in this film. Cate Blanchett is as wonderful as she always is, proving once more she is one of today's most versatile and convincing actors. Johnny Depp and John Turturro are also both excellent in their roles. Overall, I would have to recommend this to anyone who enjoys good character development/superb acting.
55 out of 64 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
more than just a chick flick
Brian B-27 September 2003
I dreaded watching this movie, but it was all that was on that I hadn't seen. I figured it would be a typical weepy....nice Jews, bad nazis, concentration camps.... seen it all before.

Well, I thought, Christina Ricci is always nice to watch.

Surprisingly, this movie is a small well crafted gem. The script is full of subtleties, and there are well done performances, no ham allowed ( sorry, bad ethnic pun).

In fact, Cate Blanchett in the second female role is the only clinker, more due to miscasting than ability.

The strength of Christina's character was worth the few melodramatic twists.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
nice costumes, predictable lines
Eric_0092 September 2006
Like other reviewers noted, the costumes and set design are impressive, but the lines are occasionally tiresome. It is hard to take the threatening WW2 backdrop seriously when the one-liners sound like B-movie made-for-TV clichés. Ricci did not carry the lead role competently. She lacks the gravitas necessary to convincingly convey the antisemitism and pariah status that the Fegele/Susan character was aiming for. Too bad since the moving music deserves a profound lead actor. Unfortunately, the superb soundtrack seemed to set in stark relief the inadequacy of the dialogue.

I gave it a 6 by reminding myself that the 1-10 ranking system needs to stoop low enough to include really awful movies and this movie was certainly not awful. But certainly not great either.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Cate the Bandit
enc1no3 April 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Possible spoilers within

Cate steals this movie. Like a bandit if you will. Watch her play the scene at the dinner. She conveys her characters thoughts perfectly with just her eyes. Her Russian accent is endearing and she is visually stunning. You could take her picture in the dark and she would still look beautiful.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The movie was a big disappointment
brogers333330 May 2002
The acting was great except for Ricci and Depp. Depp has already played the brooding, silent type of gypsy before probably wearing the same clothes. John Turturro and others were good. Personally I think the horse in the opera scene gave the best review!
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Beautiful film about risk, change and difference
marioncap2 January 2006
The only reason I did not rate this film a "10" was that the Christina Ricci character (Feygele/Suzie), who is supposed to be a superb singer in the era before microphones, was not dubbed by someone who can actually sing. (Ricci, gifted actress that she is, can't, and to a musician, that's a problem). Other than that, I loved this movie. Ricci and Depp, as impossible lovers who just happen to be members of the two peoples most persecuted by the Nazis (a Jew and a Gypsy), are both perfection in their roles. John Tuturro and Cate Blanchett, as (respectively) an Alpha-male Italian tenor enamored of Mussolini, and Suzie's fellow dancer/confidante seduced by the tenor and his Fascist tendencies, are such compelling characters that they almost needed their own separate movie. The cinematography is beautiful throughout, and the sense of history, of the sweep of time, is wonderfully evoked. Last but not least, the score of the film memorably weaves together an old Yiddish lullaby with "Je crois entendre encore," the great tenor aria from Bizet's "Pearl Fishers." Both melodies share the same rhythmic and harmonic skeleton, and the film score reveals and celebrates it. A wonderful musical reflection on the theme of the film in general. Wait until the end of the movie to see what I mean -- the music explains it all.
21 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good story that evokes the fear of the times
michellefox6010 January 2009
Nice balance of plot and characters, avoids some WW2 hackneyed scenes I've seen too many times. I wasn't too keen on minor details of the ending.

Fast moving, with pauses for emotional emphasis. Visually beautiful. Held my attention all the way, and got me thinking.

Really interestingly cast, used tastefully in restrained performances which contributed to the apprehensive feeling of dread that pervades the movie. Rings true to my idea of the times, quiet frantic fear.

I may have been unfortunate in seeing an edited version for TV, as some of the fast cuts between scenes were a bit too much for me and I had to catch up with where the story was.

Well worth a look
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Oh, my God....!!
art-miller4 April 2006
It is difficult to put into words just how terrible this film really is. But, my dears, I'll try...

Cate Blanchett -- what is she doing appearing in this rubbish? -- gives a comedy performance throughout complete with Monty Python Russian accent.

Johnny Depp -- what is he doing appearing in this rubbish? -- gives a sixth-form moody performance that is truly laughable.

The story wanders all over the place; the dialogue is hilarious the supporting cast seem totally bemused by the whole thing. The Ricci girl gives a 0ne-expression performance that makes you wonder if she was on Librium.

Two hours of my life wasted....
11 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
images as poetry, music as dialog
dandelion-11 October 2003
I enjoyed this movie, much more than I thought I would reading the synopsis of the story. I was caught up by this meditation on human spirit.

The cinematography created one stunning image after another, carried along by one of the most beautiful soundtracks that I have heard.

Two couples, sharply contrasted; one couple told you everything about themselves, while the other revealed only what could not be hidden: Susie and Caesar were stoical, passive, watching, and waiting....as a catastrophic moment in history enveloped them.

It seemed to me that the director purposely expected the viewer to participate in the story, using imagination and wonder to ponder the unanswered questions about human nature and need.

The ending of the film was a bit too abrupt. I would have loved to have seen more development leading up to the resolution of Susie's journey. But it certainly didn't mar the film for me, rather it emphasized why 'The Man Who Cried' was so completely non-commercial and why it mystified and therefore angered the 'connect-the-dots' crowd.

If you are in the mood for a beautiful, lyrical, non-linear poem-film, give this one a try.
19 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Singing Voices
kinbc9 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I found this movie very compelling to watch in every way--except for the plot. I've submitted this comment to thank the poster who cleared up my confusion about who sang, and who lipped-synced. I thought the tenor voice was beautiful, and Ms.Ricchi (she made it clear in the movie that she never had any formal training) sounded sincere and feminine. The non-verbal relationship between C. and Johnny seemed believable and appropriate for two such marginalized social misfits. I would like to see them together in a less serious movie, because I think they ha great chemistry together. Since this is such a character driven movie, I'll close by saying that Ms. Blanchett was wonderful, but that I couldn't relate to Mr. T. being an opera singer. He just "looks" and has too many mannerisms that scream Italian-American. P.S. This is a good review--but it wasn't submitted by me"kinbc" in Canada. It is now Dec. 9th, so the rightful owner has probably moved on--now to find the Review that I did post...Kinbc
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
What's the point?
rainking_es14 March 2007
I really don't know what was the purpose of Sally Potter when she made this movie. She begins telling the story of this Russian girl (CHristina Ricci) that has to go into exile in England and that's looking for her father. But Potter deflects the attention again and again to some irrelevant characters. Her script is quite imprecise and the way she shoots is sometimes pretentious and pompous, What's more remarkable about "The man who cried" is the performance of John Turturro (he perfectly plays an Italian opera singer) and Cate Blanchett. Christina Ricci is not specially brilliant (she can do better than that), and Johnny Depp is starting to make me sick with that silent-full-of-inner-life character.

The music lovers will enjoy the soundtrack of the movie, but I don't think that's a good reason to watch this movie.

*My rate: 3/10
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed