TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

Laikals The greatest movie ever made..!

ShangLuda irable film.

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

tcc422 Subtle and understated,an excellent film. Sometimes about the missed opportunities in life,those right in front of us that we have no idea of their significance. Sometimes about fame and celebrity,and the distance between the illusion and reality.And about just being human,about "Life",such a witty title with double meaning...This film will not beat you over the head,but if you pay attention,it is beautiful in it's message.

SnoopyStyle It's 1955 Los Angeles. Photographer Dennis Stock (Robert Pattinson) is tired of the red carpet. He wants to do a LIFE magazine photo essay on unknown actor James Dean (Dane DeHaan). Editor John Morris (Joel Edgerton) dismisses the idea and ridicules the pictures. Studio head Jack Warner (Ben Kingsley) tries to deal with the flighty new actor. Dean's relationship with Pier Angeli falls apart when she announces her marriage to Vic Damone. Stock follows Dean taking the iconic pictures from New York to his family farm in Indiana. Stock's personal life with his son suffers.The photos are cultural icons. The story behind the photos is not necessarily that compelling. The real LIFE magazine photos should appear at the beginning. The funniest part of the movie is John Morris' constant dismissal of the unknown actor. Dane DeHaan is a great young actor. Here he mumbles a lot and lacks Dean's brooding. A younger Pattinson would fit much better. His presence only reminds the audience of that. Despite this being Stock's story, this is still James Dean's movie. A top name actor needs to play Dean. The final problem is the movie's name. It's not enough. That's also the story of the movie. It's not enough.

siderite I don't know much about James Dean, so I can only comment on the movie and having seen it, it's two hours of performance pieces from Pattinson, still trying to clean the Twilight stigma off his name, and DeHaan, wanting to get out of the casting hole for a mentally unstable person in which he has found himself. Both of them did a great job.Yet the script is slow moving through the subtle interaction between the two characters, happening just before James Dean became truly famous. Anyone expecting Hollywood shenanigans and bad boy theatrics is going to be disappointed. Instead, we are treated to two young men who are just beginning to figure out who they really are and tie a temporary bond a friendship over their shared confusion and the pressure of the world for them to be something else.A beautiful movie, but one that shows only a glimpse of who Jimmy was and nothing spectacular or shocking. It is a "life" film, as my mother used to call these things, and therefore not appropriately entertaining for everyone.

nikolobg A movie about James Dean stands or falls by the portrayal of the man. Everything else is secondary to capturing that unique mesmerizing person.I am a straight male, yet I the first time I googled that name and started browsing his photos. There was something there completely out of the ordinary. Strength with fragility, sadness with mischievousness, rebellion resting in the moment. Its like watching young Marlon Brando or Ryan Gosling in a movie like Drive, there is something extraordinary there your brain cant define but can understand.Dane DeHaan, who I don't know outside of this movie, could probably portray Justin Bieber just fine, but playing James Dean requires a different beast of an actor all together.