Good movie but grossly overrated

Absolutely the worst movie.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Very brilliant film, with (not only) children acting very naturally. A simple story of brother and sister hurrying up to lend each other the only pair of shoes they have, after the brother lost them. It's also a story of material poverty of the children, but richness in feelings and beauty between a brother and a sister. It reminded me of some neorealism italian cinema movement. It's a wonderful example of cinema based on feelings and acting rather than budget.

This movie feels the heart wrenching. The Children of Heaven is a beautiful illustration of how adversity draws people closer together. This is the best children's movie i have ever seen.

CHILDREN OF HEAVEN Majid Majidi Iranian film marked with lot of classics from undisputable craft and theme which organized and conducted by some power packed legends including Abbas Kirostami, Majid Majidi, Asghar Farhadi, Jafer Panahi etc. These legends just show off something simple atmosphere and outlook that engaged with commons. There themes were so close with the ongoing simple aspects of human beings. Basically they are the subjects of things and beings. Their movies will also often open us to the marvelous world of unknown (but common) that we can read in daily press and in the streets. (So far from Bunuel's view about films). As far as, for me Majid Majidi looks astonishing about the depiction of downtrodden concepts and ideas. He just portrayed the basic plot of low class people around the Iranian outskirts. Children of Heaven mesmerized me because of the subtle representation of low class people. It is not about anything which marks calamities and atrocities mainly associate with common people, it's just a simple opening to the world of kids or children. This movie opens up to us two siblings of age around 11 or 12, a brother and a sister. We could understand their family appearance from the initial sequence of the movie when the title cards going on. A person repairs a shoe of a small girl. When we look close and analyze we can find out the shoe gets more damaged and there is no worth to repair it. Going back to home after it gets repaired Ali (the brother) lost the shoe and their turns up the beginning of the movie. Majidi's class can be seen at every course of the movie. He just put the camera to a brother and sister and captured their interactions in a candid way. In the initial part, because of the afraid of his father they both convey the absence of shoe and the consequences associate with them when they do not have a shoe and everything, they just scribbled through the notebook. They can't talk anything about the topic because their father will hear this. So while they are studying they just share their dialogues through writing which is so vast in its context. The audience gets to know more about their complex stage and the problem relate with them and everything through those writings.

On the face of it, this is a gentle and warm hearted movie that so many reviewers have detailed already that I won't have to go into an explanation of what occurred. The young actor portraying Ali (Amir Farrokh Hashemian) was quite incredible conveying the emotions involved with losing his sister's shoes, trying to explain the dilemma to her and dealing with the school principal who always seemed to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when Ali got to school late.The sister (Bahare Seddiqui) was also quite good but not as accomplished as her sibling. I actually found the side story of Zahra dropping her pen and her new friend Roya returning it to be somewhat more compelling. The subject of the 'lost' shoes never came up between them, even though Zahra saw her wearing them, retrieved from the discarded material at the produce stand. One wonders why the subject never came up; one assumes Zahra was too shy or embarrassed to ask about them.What I'm not understanding is why there wasn't more of a sense of closure for Ali and Zahra over the fate of the shoes. Granted, Ali went the extra mile by entering the race contest and winning, but in this case, it was the father who would inadvertently save the day with new shoes for both of them after earning a good day's pay. There is probably some meaning to be taken from the goldfish ending that eludes me, but it's something I won't dwell on. The film works as a feel good movie for the resolution of Ali and Zahra's plight, but I didn't get a sense of what was so extraordinary in the telling.