Far Side of the Moon (2003)

Lack of good storyline.

A bit overrated, but still an amazing film

The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

This movie is an acquired taste. At first, I don't realize that Philipe and Andre's connection besides being brothers. Both are brilliantly played by the writer and director, Robert LePage. He is a visionary who has written, directed, and act reminds you of French Canadian Woody Allen. In this film, he plays Phillipe, a loner who wants to get his Ph.D. in proving men's narcissism and the quest for space. He has tried to argue it a few times before and been denied. In his quest, his mother dies. He and his brother have an estranged relationship. The film explores Phillipe's history especially his fascination with space. This film has its moments especially the spa scene at the gym where he runs into Carl. I can relate to Phillipe who I think is misunderstood. The ending threw me off completely and I didn't get it. We can all relate to Phillipe who has a dead end job answering phones for the government.

I really enjoyed this movie, even better than No, which was also subtle and quirky. The dialogue is flawless. Both Lepage's sibling portrayals are spot on, the cinematography tricks are engaging and perfectly pitched, as is the supporting cast. My only quip is... boy, aren't there any literate Russians in Canada? There are at least two major misspellings, one above the entrance to Tsiolkovsky Institute in (presumably) Moscow (there is no such institution in real life). The other is on the poster at the airport towards the end of the movie. And the Aeroflot announcement on the plane to Moscow sounds just a little bit accented and un-Aeroflotish. Again, this is a great movie and should be widely seen.

I finally got to see this movie, and pretty glad I did. I know Lepage a bit because of works he did in theater (and the fact that he usually does plays is pretty obvious in the way the film is made, if you pay attention, specially the way he uses the background in many scenes).I first have to warn a few people who are thinking about seeing this movie. Although the magic of it, by the way Lepage plays with scenery, background and various imaginative, non-realistic shots, is pretty accessible to everyone (like say Big Fish is), some people might discard the plot as simplistic and unworthy. If it is hard to actually say the opposite, the point is that to make a plot that's original or particularly thrilling wasn't the goal. It's basically just the day to day life of a dreamer who isn't quite successful in any aspect of his life (would it be on a professional or social basis). But the movie wants to show that despite theses lacks, the main character (I forgot the name) is still an original person, with imagination et interesting thoughts. To make that point, I might take the various imaginary scenes where Lepage take us, or simply the video the guy shots fort the SETI program. You'll notice that most of the interesting commentary and clever interventions by the main character are made while shooting this movie, and that he is alone doing so. It just emphasis the fact that he's apparently quite boring, but actually an interesting person.Another clever idea in the movie is that there actually isn't many differences between the shots taken during the children hood of the guy (in the 70's) and the on taken in 2000, while he's 40. Besides, many transitions take place from 2000 to the 70's or the other way around without any warning. This is to show that the character didn't really evolved much. He was a dreamer when younger, and unlike many he didn't change when he grew up.About transitions, they all are very very smooth, and you end up at the end of the movie not so sure if it wasn't only one long shot. Any viewer able to appreciate a movie for anything else but it's plot should see this one. The soundtrack, mostly Beethoven songs, is also quite fit.

For people in the Theatre community, Lepage is a much heralded genius. But the nature of theatre is that you have to be in the right place at the right time to see his work. With this movie he has etched a beautiful masterpiece for world wide viewing (granted it gets a decent release). I'm not sure if it's just my enthusiasm from having seen the play but the story was just one that I felt I wanted to embrace again. The stage play was so cinematic that a movie seemed inevitable, and the transitions between scenes were even enhanced through the use of a camera rather than stage. This is really too biased to be a review, but if you haven't seen it, you really should.