Angels in America

Rating:
Summary: I Never Tire of This Breathtaking Masterpiece
Review: Deeply emotional, wildly inventive, perfectly cast and superbly acted, Angels in America deserves to be acknowledged for the groundbreaking triumph that it is rather than dismissed by those who simply dislike the its characters' politics or lifestyles. While there are certainly legitimate criticisms that can be made (e.g., the dramatic tension doesn't always unfold consistently, and the long speeches would benefit from a red pencil in places) it's rare to find a movie that offers such intelligent dramatic fodder for the actors, or that stretches the imagination so vividly.

Through this movie and several others of comparable merit (e.g. "Wit" and "The Gathering Storm,") HBO has upped the cultural ante in television, bridging the gap between high art and mass entertainment. Keep it up, HBO.


Rating:
Summary: Great cast, hope you like gay men stories...
Review: Very disappointing. You get to spend several hours watching the story of several gay men that are either dying or finding new lovers. There's also weird ghost and supernatural stuff happening, but it doesn't seem have a point. One visit from an 'angel' turns out to be a rather pagan and sex based visit.

This is a series where you keep expecting there to be a good point for everything happening and there isn't.

Rating:
Summary: Tired tirade
Review: This "movie" is an endless rant against anything and everything that is NOT pro homosexual, pro democratic socialism, and pro cultural marxism. Pure propaganda for the anti-family, ant-religon crowd. Save your money.

Rating:
Summary: Worth every minute
Review: tony kushner has amazingly worked all his feelings about the important social, emotional and personal issues in this staggering work of art. It is so subtle and yet it manages to connect with audiences far and wide.. This is probably the best thing I have ever seen.

Rating:
Summary: I am Speechless...
Review: I am unable to find the proper words to adequately describe Angels in America...
I do know that I will have to go back and view it again because I know I have missed so much...
Meryl Streep as a Rabbi? Who would have thought...?
Give this movie a shot and STAY WITH IT. You will not be sorry.
If the subject matter is too offensive for you, perhaps you should try HERBIE GOES BANANAS or THE APPLE DUMPLING GANG.


Rating:
Summary: Kushner is the new Shakespeare
Review: This film version of Angels in America is an exceptional accomplishment. The production and acting were superb, possibly some of the best caught on film. Al Pacino does a wonderful job of playing the dying Roy Cohn. Meryl Streep is magnificent playing both the ghost of Ethel Rosenberg and the Mormon matron, Hannah Pitt. Mary Louise Parker plays the Mormon housewife struggling with a gay husband while also struggling with her sanity. Justin Kirk is superb as Prior, a gay man dying of AIDS while also dealing with the abandonment by his partner, Lewis.Patrick Wilson suffers through the guilt of leaving his wife, telling his mother about his sexual orientation, while being propelled into the energy of his new gay identity. All the other actors were superb but Streep and Pacino were extremely powerful and moving.

The script is poetic, much like Shakespeare in beauty, fluidity, and emotional penetration. Therefore the viewer should not expect realistic naturalistic dialogue. The stage is often more suited for the poetic than is the screen, but Mike Nichols stayed true to the message and kept the beautiful dialogue as originally written. The language is so stimulating that I suggest the viewer have a copy of screenplay nearby so they can re-experience the lines.

What is this play about? It is about AIDS, conservative politics, history, relationships, self awareness, religion, theology, love, forgiveness, survival and transcendence.

What are the angels? They are the ever expanding idea of freedom. Only a genius of Kushner's standing could equate the movement of the Mormon's to Utah to gain religious freedom, with the modern gay civil rights movement, with the rise of Gorbachev and the fall of the Soviet Union.

What is the central theme? The tension between our duty and responsibilities to others and the duty and responsibility to be true to ourself. Joe and Lewis both struggle with this dilemna which is the central armature of the play. However upon that armature hangs far more pain and history that almost any other theatrical production.

I strongly recommend this production and wish I could give it more than 5 stars.

More life. Let the great work begin.

Rating:
Summary: 3.5 stars: a noble effort but flawed
Review: I have to agree with a number of the reviewers here that, while "Angels in America" is a noble effort, it is flawed due to the theatricality of the dialogue, frequent heavy-handedness in making its points, and a some acting weaknesses. While the angels and other examples of the supernatural are a central element of the film, I feel that they almost could have been eliminated. Take away Emma Thompson's angel and the other visions of Prior Walter, take away some of the lame made-for-tv-melodrama among the young gay men, take away Mary-Louise Parker's annoying characterization of gay Mormon lawyer's wife and you could have had an effective three hour film. I won't go into explaining all these elements because I assume that most reviewers have seen this film and simply want to express their opinion. You could have had a great story centering on a scaled back account of Prior and Lou and Joe (with a different actress as his wife), Al Pacino as Roy Cohn, Meryl Streep as Joe's mother, and Jeffrey Wright as the nurse (forget about his silly other role oboe-playing guide to Parker's supernatural excursions. OK. Keep in the few minutes of Streep as a aged rabbi. That was good. I like Emma Thompson but the film did not need her in the roles of a doctor (her accent doesn't work) and a street person and it DID NOT need her as the angel, because the film did NOT need the angel. That said. Pacino steals the show as Roy Cohn and Streep is brilliant in all of her roles. (OK> I would keep her Ethel Rosenberg in Cohn's hallucinating.) As to all the attacks on conservatives, RIGHT ON, but those could have been edited down. There were just too many flaws in this film and I found getting through it an endurance test, so much so that I would leave the DVD running while going to the kitchen to fix a snack.

Rating:
Summary: This mini-series is true.
Review: I wanted to like this mini-series more than I did. Unfortunately, quite a bit of it did not translate as well on television as it did on stage. Biggest quibble, much of the dialogue did not translate well onto the smaller medium.
I have to admit that I am surprised at the vitriol and hatred of some of the reviews this film has received. I suppose that much of the ill will towards PWA that existed in the 80's has not gone away. My advice, if you are a homophobe do not watch this movie, and if you do watch it don't complain about gay characters. One more thing, this film is not lying about the way that the AIDS pandemic has been treated by the Republicans and much of America. Let them complain about revisionist history, but the conservatives are the one's doing all the revising on the topic of AIDS. This film is the true (if somewhat surrealist) story of what actually happened.
Regardless, I recommend the film, but treat it as a companion piece to the plays.