MovieChat Forums > Angels in America (2003) Discussion > Does This Film Hold Up?

Does This Film Hold Up?

posted 16 years ago by HootieDean
11 replies | jump to latest

I just watched the movie after maybe 4 years and though I still enjoyed the film, I don't think it holds up as well as it should.

There are some plot holes that I became aware of this time that took me out of the story and the story itself seems a touch convaluted and a little disconnected from scene to scene or relativity to each intersecting story.

Don't get me wrong, the acting is superd from all parties involved but I'm not so sure I knew what the hell was going on.

So do you think the film holds up after all this time? Is it just me?

[–] fortean2 16 years ago

It holds up perfectly as far as I'm concerned. Must be just you. ;-)

[–] HootieDean 16 years ago

I'll go with that it's just me. Sometimes there are films so good that re-watching them can ONLY decrease the enjoyment. I think this is one of those films.

[–] sosiopat 16 years ago

Could you mention some examples of plot holes?

[–] HootieDean 16 years ago

I could...

[–] sosiopat 16 years ago

I genuinely want you to give examples.

The only one I noticed is that Belize gets a bottle of AZT from Roy, takes about five -- and then later when Roy dies he takes the entire stash and when he presents it to Prior he is surprised, as if Belize didn't give the previous stash to him.

But then again, Belize probably knows a lot of people with AIDS who needs it more.

[–] HootieDean 16 years ago

There are no plot holes, this film is perfect.

[–] Athena5026 15 years ago

I don't see any plot holes but an update puts the Cohn/Rosenberg relationship into a slightly different view.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg

Basically (if you didn't read it) a partner of Julius Rosenberg's admitted that Julius was spying for the Soviets. He stated that he didn't know if Ethel was directly involved, but he believed that she was aware of her husband's activities.

It doesn't make Roy Cohn any less of a villain, but the first few times I saw this, I thought of the Rosenbergs as completely innocent victims. Now...?

"Leave the gun. Take the canolli."

[–] DryToast 15 years ago

the first few times I saw this, I thought of the Rosenbergs as completely innocent victims. Now...?

Since there's evidence that the prosecution elicited false testimony from the conspirators to say that Ethel was actively involved when she wasn't (e.g., Ethel typing something that was actually handwritten by someone else, a story that changed between the grand jury and the trial in order to falsely incriminate Ethel), you are still free to see Ethel as a victim of miscarried justice. She wasn't charged with merely knowing her husband was spying and doing nothing to stop it. Whatever her knowledge (and even approval) of her husband's activities, she was likely innocent of the actual charges brought against her and the prosecution knew this at the time ("She called our bluff.")

"I don't seem able to strike the congenial note."

[–] LotusSlinger 15 years ago

I'm the opposite. AIA gets better overtime with me.

[–] Bubbles_Depo 15 years ago

I've seen AiA four or five times, and it remains one of my favorite films of all time.

But, it doesn't have the emotional impact on me that it did the first time. I think it's because I really expected Prior to die, and knowing he lives makes the movie less traumatizing to me. (I know that sounds like a good thing, but the relief I felt at the end of the first viewing obviously isn't there on subsequent viewings.)

I still love it, and get more out of it each time. But there's no reliving the emotional wallop of being an AiA virgin.

Every day is a gift...Does it have to be a pair of socks?

[–] HootieDean 14 years ago

I just finished watching it again and it really is spectacular film making. Whatever my issue was before, I am over it. Everyone involved should be proud and I am thankful to have been able to experience it.