That was an excellent one.

Expected more

An unexpected masterpiece

Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Myth of finger prints is truly an interesting film with great performances by the cast and a great screenplay. It is worth buying the DVD. The film its self can tell a thousand words so i just summarized the good things about it. 1. Great directing 2. Outstanding cast 3. Intelligent 4. great cinematography 5.great editing 6. Just a great movie and the standards of movies or films must go higher to be able to beat how great this movie is. The greatness of this film just glows already when you are only holding the DVD.Julianne Moore throws to us an outstanding performance which of course will not be forgotten and i believe that a book that talks about the greatest films ever made this film will be in it.

I just watched this film, and I came on here to see if I'd missed something that I really should have paid attention to! I really cant help but think 'Geez, that's an hour and 40 minutes of my life that I'll never get back!' I must admit that I think the acting was great, Juliana Moore was amazing and so was Noah Wyle, but what was the point of the sister and the other brother? What was going on with the brothers blonde girlfriend? she was perky and had some personality but it went nowhere... the story was just so slow and - how do I put this? non descript! If you want to see a film with a dysfunctional family, inappropriate relationships, humour and an answer to the questions posed during the movie, then watch The Family Stone...now THAT'S a movie worth seeing.

Spoilers herein.I am usually able to avoid getting wrapped up in celebrity gossip and such. Sometimes, the widely known reality of who a person is becomes part of the cinematic presence, and in that case I don't feel guilty exploring an off-screen persona. Christina Ricci is the someone like this for me.But there is another reason to worry about the external life: when it affects the art of a treasure. Julianne Moore is one of our most frighteningly intelligent actresses. I especially appreciate her `folded' acting, which presents several character-related dialogs at once. She - and a very few of her colleagues - lift film to a level that advances the whole society.In nearly every project she does something interesting, even when the filmmaker is oblivious to the more nuanced spaces available. But not here.This project is a mess. Yet another `character-driven' group encounter. There are dozens and dozens of these, the first respite of a theatrical mind thinking they know something about cinema. They CAN work, but we need something more than simply walking through damaged lives. This project is somewhere between `Affliction' and `Big Chill,' but where they open lives, this views them remotely. We do have the requisite precious tinkly music. We do have some very stylized exterior shots (very nice) to emphasize opening of issues compared to the claustrophobia of the house.The template requires a play-with-the-play. In `Chill' it was the video; `On Golden Pond' had the fishing drama. Here is the Rabbit book. Could have been more clumsy, but not by much.Moore's character had lots of opportunity for the kind of folded projection she's famous for. In another project she would have gone ahead and filled these multiple channels between her presence and us - like say in her Altman projects where he just leaves ALL of that up to the actor. But here, she sticks to what the director intends, and that is depressingly one-dimensional. Community theater stuff.Why should I care? Well because this thick talent is now her husband. Will it matter? I don't know. I have a database of projects where the director and actor are lovers. Sometimes an intelligent director can lift a mundane actress: as in the Robbins/Sarandon; Welles/Hayworth; Mamet/Pidgeon; Figgis/Burrows; De Palma/Allen; Fellini/Masini; Wenders/Kreuzer; Allen/Keaton-Farrow; Coen/McDormand; Branagh/Thompson; Cameron/Hamilton; Godard/Karina-Wiazemsky; Besson/Jovovich; Burton/Marie; Harlin/Davis pairings. Sometimes it doesn't matter, each just does their own thing (Newman/Woodward and lots of others). A few other effects, but the result is a small number of well-defined outcomes among several dozen such couplings. But there are also cases where the director/lover ruins the actress (Minelli/Garland; Beatty/Christie; Hallstrom/Olin).What family drama will transpire in Julianne's life? Will it be like this film, in both character (she is a gallery receptionist and a failed artist) and form? Will we lose our champion?Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 4: Has some interesting elements.

"The Myth..." is yet another of many films about families converging on the parent's home for a holiday with all their baggage in tow, emotional and Samsonite. The film is a good shoot and offers a good cast doing good things with what they are given. Unfortunately, the audience is relegated to voyeurism with little in which to partake as the film wends it way through family matters and issues of little consequence which seem curious at best. A lukewarm watch for those into relationship films.