egress63
Joined Mar 2009
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges3
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings876
egress63's rating
Reviews11
egress63's rating
I first learnt about Hannah Arendt two years ago and since then she has become one of the most influential contemporary philosophers who has developed the way I think. Having read a few of her works, I was happy to discover this biopic and was hoping that it would help me understand her work better. I was also hoping that it would be nice introduction into the work of Hannah Arendt for some of my friends or family members (I've mentioned her to them several times).
The movie succeeds in the first part but fails disastrously in the second attempt. As an personal already acquainted with her work and her life, I found this movie to be easy to follow and very well produced. It introduced some characters like Hans Jonas and Gershom Scholem whom I had not known about earlier. However, I don't think this movie serves as a good jumping point for a viewer who is completely unaware of Hannah, her work during the Eichmann trial and the repercussions that followed. The director assumes that the viewer knows all this (including the concept of 'banality of evil') and instead focuses on the milieu Hannah was in and how she came to the understanding how totalitarian societies can produce people like Eichmann. That said, a person like my father, who knows nothing about Hannah or her work would not be able to get all this simply because the movie does not provide enough exposition about these concepts (until the last 10 minutes of the movie).
So, who is the movie for? I think this movie is made expressly for a college professors who are teaching contemporary western philosophy to their undergraduate students and want to increase the understanding of their class. The movie would serve as a wonderful teaching accessory that may spur some students to read about Hannah further. However, it does not offer the ordinary layman who is unaware of Hannah Arendt anything much of significant value.
6.5/10.
The movie succeeds in the first part but fails disastrously in the second attempt. As an personal already acquainted with her work and her life, I found this movie to be easy to follow and very well produced. It introduced some characters like Hans Jonas and Gershom Scholem whom I had not known about earlier. However, I don't think this movie serves as a good jumping point for a viewer who is completely unaware of Hannah, her work during the Eichmann trial and the repercussions that followed. The director assumes that the viewer knows all this (including the concept of 'banality of evil') and instead focuses on the milieu Hannah was in and how she came to the understanding how totalitarian societies can produce people like Eichmann. That said, a person like my father, who knows nothing about Hannah or her work would not be able to get all this simply because the movie does not provide enough exposition about these concepts (until the last 10 minutes of the movie).
So, who is the movie for? I think this movie is made expressly for a college professors who are teaching contemporary western philosophy to their undergraduate students and want to increase the understanding of their class. The movie would serve as a wonderful teaching accessory that may spur some students to read about Hannah further. However, it does not offer the ordinary layman who is unaware of Hannah Arendt anything much of significant value.
6.5/10.
Watch this one if you like your movies with no exposition, little plot and glacial progression. None of these things are necessarily bad but it is well worth pointing this out for viewers who may enter the movie expecting a fast sci-fi thriller but instead get treated to a movie that is more social commentary and less about a plot.
The movie is wonderfully acted by Scarlett Johansson and the direction is purposefully bland so that any inattentive viewer may simply get bored. However underlying the blandness is a rich commentary which to me spoke to how men and women interact and how relationships necessarily imply vulnerability. I'm sure other viewers would project their own views and come away from the movie with their own unique interpretations about what this movie has to say.
On the whole, this is a decent movie. It may not be the best movie for a Friday evening (which is what I did!) but if you're into art-house movies that are inscrutable and ponderous, this just may be the next movie that you ought to watch.
6/10.
The movie is wonderfully acted by Scarlett Johansson and the direction is purposefully bland so that any inattentive viewer may simply get bored. However underlying the blandness is a rich commentary which to me spoke to how men and women interact and how relationships necessarily imply vulnerability. I'm sure other viewers would project their own views and come away from the movie with their own unique interpretations about what this movie has to say.
On the whole, this is a decent movie. It may not be the best movie for a Friday evening (which is what I did!) but if you're into art-house movies that are inscrutable and ponderous, this just may be the next movie that you ought to watch.
6/10.
I first learnt about Hannah Arendt two years ago and since then she has become one of the most influential contemporary philosophers who has developed the way I think. Having read a few of her works, I was happy to discover this biopic and was hoping that it would help me understand her work better. I was also hoping that it would be nice introduction into the work of Hannah Arendt for some of my friends or family members (I've mentioned her to them several times).
The movie succeeds in the first part but fails disastrously in the second attempt. As an personal already acquainted with her work and her life, I found this movie to be easy to follow and very well produced. It introduced some characters like Hans Jonas and Gershom Scholem whom I had not known about earlier. However, I don't think this movie serves as a good jumping point for a viewer who is completely unaware of Hannah, her work during the Eichmann trial and the repercussions that followed. The director assumes that the viewer knows all this (including the concept of 'banality of evil') and instead focuses on the milieu Hannah was in and how she came to the understanding how totalitarian societies can produce people like Eichmann. That said, a person like my father, who knows nothing about Hannah or her work would not be able to get all this simply because the movie does not provide enough exposition about these concepts (until the last 10 minutes of the movie).
So, who is the movie for? I think this movie is made expressly for a college professors who are teaching contemporary western philosophy to their undergraduate students and want to increase the understanding of their class. The movie would serve as a wonderful teaching accessory that may spur some students to read about Hannah further. However, it does not offer the ordinary layman who is unaware of Hannah Arendt anything much of significant value.
6.5/10
The movie succeeds in the first part but fails disastrously in the second attempt. As an personal already acquainted with her work and her life, I found this movie to be easy to follow and very well produced. It introduced some characters like Hans Jonas and Gershom Scholem whom I had not known about earlier. However, I don't think this movie serves as a good jumping point for a viewer who is completely unaware of Hannah, her work during the Eichmann trial and the repercussions that followed. The director assumes that the viewer knows all this (including the concept of 'banality of evil') and instead focuses on the milieu Hannah was in and how she came to the understanding how totalitarian societies can produce people like Eichmann. That said, a person like my father, who knows nothing about Hannah or her work would not be able to get all this simply because the movie does not provide enough exposition about these concepts (until the last 10 minutes of the movie).
So, who is the movie for? I think this movie is made expressly for a college professors who are teaching contemporary western philosophy to their undergraduate students and want to increase the understanding of their class. The movie would serve as a wonderful teaching accessory that may spur some students to read about Hannah further. However, it does not offer the ordinary layman who is unaware of Hannah Arendt anything much of significant value.
6.5/10