The Red Violin (1999)

I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

I didn't know if there was even the slightest chance this was based on a true history so I searched for the name of Nicolo Bussotti and learned that the character in the movie was fictitious, although parts of the red violin's origins WAS based on the life of Antonio Stradivari who lived during the era that opened the story. I rather enjoyed this picture and the way it traced the violin's history through the centuries, along with the tarot card gimmick that introduced each of the major turning points in the instrument's history. Most of the narrative appeared to fit historically, although I did have to laugh when the Oxford violinist Pope (Jason Flemyng) declared his lustful desire for Lady Victoria (Greta Scacchi) by stating "I feel a composition coming on". That was just such a concession to modern dialog that it disrupted the continuity of the scene for me. I'm still chuckling about it.What I wasn't prepared for in the story was it's twist finale, given Charles Morritz's (Samuel L. Jackson) scholarly and professional approach to determining the violin's authenticity. As the instrument's restorer (Don McKellar) proclaims that "This is the single most perfect acoustic machine I have ever seen", there's still no indication that the pair would conspire to pull off the crime of the century. The film's ending with Morritz making a clean getaway rivaled the revelation made regarding another Samuel Jackson character, that of Elijah Price, in a movie that came out just a couple years after this one titled "Unbreakable". He was even a collector of sorts in that movie too.

I understand this movie is about a violin, but what are objects if there is no human hands to make them "alive"? My point is: I love the fact that the violin is somehow cursed because of the cause that made it red, but it doesn't stand for itself, without a musician's hands to bring it to life. So, why wasn't i able to feel any connection with any of the characters? The movie tries to say too much as it explores too many stories, only to tell us the violin is cursed, but it failed to deliver, because for the viewer to feel that, there would have to be a connection between us and the characters. On the contrary, i couldn't care less about any of them, except maybe the orphan virtuoso.I also felt that the "passion" that I (as a viewer) was supposed to feel for the violin, just wasn't there. There should be more emotional items to connect the viewer to it, like for instance, better music. What happened to sweet and dramatic and revealing melodies? They aren't there at all, and it's such a shame. I remember when i saw "Copying Beethoven" i cried all the way through his concerto, because i felt attached to him, Diane Kruger's character, and all the music, all the instruments, it was all wonderful in that scene. This movie doesn't have high moments like that.I rate it with 5 out of ten, because, although i was expecting more of this movie, i was entertained, and i also loved the motif that made the violin red. I liked the fact that we followed the violin in different moments of History, i liked that it wasn't centered only in one place and one story, i just think that it should be more centered in the characters and on how the violin grew on them.Overall it's an "ok" movie.

I enjoyed historical movies and in general find the life of a priceless antique worth reading about (or watching). I find it amazing that we can know every owner for example of a specific pearl going back several centuries, but most folks know about their own families usually just two generations back. So I thought this movie would be one I would enjoy. I also expected to hear some beautiful violin music. Wrong on both counts. The violin's history seemed too manufactured for the film's sake, not a real logical progression from one owner to another. Some of the major changes of ownership were left to the viewer's imagination and at least in my own case, I was unable to make the leap. The change did not make sense. How did the violin get to be owned by gypsies? How did it get to China? It would have made an interesting story, but where the manufactured history is stretched way beyond anything credible, the change of ownership is simply not explained. While I liked the overall concept of following the life of an object, the music, which I expected to be a major part of this film, was beyond disappointing. I don't play the violin but I can certainly appreciate beautiful music. There was very little "music" per se in this music. The only time anything that could be called "music" was played was some Chinese children's performance and it was made by accordions. The only sounds we heard coming from this supposedly incredibly valuable violin was the endless screeching, and this in spite of the fact that its journey took us through times when some of the most heavenly music on earth had been composed. Not one piece from Mozart, or resembling Mozart's style, had been offered. Just screeching. No music of any of the music's great composers was played at any time. More screeching. The sounds this violin made could have been compared to a cat scratching on a metal roof. That bad. Wonder how many CDs with the soundtrack they managed to sell. That would tell them just how "wonderful" the soundtrack was. The soundtrack was thoroughly modern, something that may be considered all the rage today. The music was probably difficult to play, but there is no sugarcoating it - the music is nothing but screeching. No melody, no rhythm, no emotion. No sweet sounds that leave a person in awe of beauty of sound. So no music, just noise. The ending climax likewise is not really any surprise like it is supposed to be, and most certainly not a shocking surprise, because I thought "the secret" was already implied in the beginning and so it didn't seem like any kind of surprise, at least not to me. If you can stand the noise that passes for a soundtrack, this is not a bad film. It's different. It's not very entertaining, but just the fact that it doesn't follow the standard mold makes it interesting. Best film ever made (as some of the reviews here indicate)? Most definitely not. I am writing this in 2013 (saw the film for the first time yesterday) and the film is all but forgotten today, 15 years after it was made. I happened to pick up an old VHS tape in a second hand store. Otherwise, it's forgotten.

This could very well be the most profound film you'll ever see. Master-crafted to near perfection: the story, acting, directing, cinematography, writing, lighting, suspense and aesthetic feel of this film is beyond anything I'd experienced. Although it didn't hit me right away, I realized three fourths of the way through this film that I might be witnessing one of the best films ever made. To take an inanimate object and show so much emotion, history and intrigue through it, weaving centuries, people and history through that object is quite simply genius. See it as soon as you can, see it with someone you love, see it with someone you hate, just see it. There are certain movies people call 'hidden gems'. Well this movie might be the one that shines brighter than them all. If the Oscars went back over each decade of film and give honorary Oscars to films that should have won best picture, this should be the winner of that hypothetical award: The Best Picture that never got any credit.