Didn't really enjoy that

I agree with pretty much all your comments. I was bored. I appreciate what they were trying to do (I believe), but there just wasn't enough there to make a 3 hour movie.

Poliakoff's stuff scores highly in the production design department but often the script and story are waffling nonsense.
So the English royals had a mentally deficient child.
Given all their inbreeding I'm surprised there aren't many more.
There is no story here, just endless images of opulent living set in a time when most of the population endured subsistence level living conditions.

This is self indulgent trash.

Well, I personally thought it was a wonderful film I will never forget and the entire thing moved me to tears. The acting was very good and the story was so simple that it was enjoyable. When you do a history like that you can't expect great action scenes. Your talking about the life of a young Prince who very few people realise existed. I knew about him, that's why I watched the film, but others didn't. I thought the whole thing was quite touching.

-

Shooting Stars [HMC Site] - http://sophie-lou.tripod.com/

It was rich in style, history, story, and refined human emotions. It brought together a lot of the causes and factors of the war and its origins that no other film or book has, or has even mentioned. It was a fantastic period piece, and not only that, it was true.

If you were expecting it to be solely about John, I'm sorry if it disappointed you. But from the sound of it, you're complaining that it was about John, or that it was even made in the first place. In which case, I'd say, why did you watch it? Turn it off if you don't like the premise or subject matter.

John's story was an excellent device to create a film that was not only about this unknown prince and his place in the royal family, but also to show the history of that fascinating period in the history of the entire world through his eyes. I can't really think of any other movie that does that, or that achieves anything like that so well.

. . . . . . . .

I don't mean to offend all the fans, I mean, I am touched by the story, and yes, it's really sad for all the autistic persons in the world, but the plot is just too empty to make a 3 hour long movie out of it. Basically, it's the story of an autistic prince who is confined to a cottage by his family. It can be summed up in only one sentence.


Everyone I know that has seen this film found it harder for the epileptic people in the world, and their families and friends. After all that is what he died from, not from autism. 99% of people in the world are thought to have at least one seizure in their life whether or not it is in their sleep or when they are awake, it is a very scary medical condition to deal with. A family member of mine has a PHD from Oxford and still when people see him having seizures they think he must be autistic, for some reason a lot of people think that seizures are not something everyone can have.
As far as I understood it, it was because of his epilepsy, not his autism that he was hidden away to begin with.




"It isn't what faith you practice, but how you practice your faith." - A.C.Y.

This movie is pure poetry. Poliakoff has a touch that you don't find often in movie directors. He provides a new way to look at the world, a way that is delicate, pure and unspoiled.It'a shame you can't grasp it.

[deleted]

if you looked for some explosions or something deep and meaningful, you are at the wrong place.
this movie is a biography, it tells the life of a character (plus scenes for dramatization)

i agree that 3 hours is way too much and many scenes were there as fillers but saying it was boring is just ridiculous.
the movie still is great and tells the story very well.



most movies you can sum up in few sentences but doing that will just skip all the details.