Walter_c

It's kinda extremely difficult for me to overestimate such a masterpiece because of its glutted images and metaphors through every single moment. Every detail, every action means something in this films, there is no scenes just for eyes watching with brain relaxing. And sooth to say I'm very tired with hearing reviews about "the film about a down". A retard (in accordance with the medical sense)? I agree. But human after all, much more humane than anybody else because of the absence of evil within. This is the toughest issue - only a retard (or mentally challenged) person can be truly humane in the modern world? "Forrest Gump" is not a manual for ones who want to become a millionaire or a great player or get lucky. This film is about life with many things it contains - from life values to a country history. Furthermore, they all are shown in a different light. So, Forrest Gump is a simple guy without mastermind at all, but squeaky clean and morally healthy man at the same time. He believes in things another people forgot, he has pure heart, being naive, but honest, frank, unmercenary and true friend. He is guileless, though he seems to be an idiot in the eyes of others. Despite of it Gump does make a difference between good and bad things, truly good and bad ones. And I discern this movie as a parable about human being, human life. "Stupid" Gump couldn't understand what was the life: "...if we each have a destiny, or if we're all just floating around accidental-like on a breeze...maybe it's both." But who can say the absolute truth about what is life being? The eternal mystery.

P.S. Another point of the film is about parenting (remember "momma always said") and how it affects the life time. So Keep an eye on your children, try to be wisdom as possible as you can.

First of all it's hard to call this motion-picture film a movie (in general meaning of this word) with a storyline and some action on the screen. It is rather a stage play based TV play (similar to "Sunset Limited") than a cinema movie. But this is not the point for real judges of chamber pieces and the art of acting. "Night #1" is an emotional and serious minded film at once. And the love scene (though it plays its role) an the beginning is nothing comparing with much harder and frank talks throughout the film. They are two, each of them is at the bottom of society and lowlife, furthermore, they both know about it. But their characters contain and reflect not only tough things but many other elements of modern life and state of things in the real world. Closer to the end some dramatic monologues have a very depressing tone, culminating some concepts and problems. I didn't understand the film's ending - what exactly the author wanted to say or to show. Maybe that the first night can be the second chance or that strangers and randoms can also be happy together?

First, I wanna quote FlashCallahan with his brilliant words that really express one of the main points of this movie: "the film carries some heavy morals about getting revenge, it can eat away at you and turn you into the one thing you despise.". This key idea is extremely important for all the mankind. And another key idea I saw is that violence generates violence - not a new one for me, but shown in a very illustrative way which reflects a deadlock principle "eye for eye". In fact, the main character's transformation into "the man, who is able to stand up" is a developmental dead end to a savage, not a human. Indeed, Darren Healy's character had no self-defense skills, probably, had no experience of being attacked or hurted, unable to fight. Anyway, his "compensation" all these missed things transformed him neither to a "real man", nor to human at all. The ability to kill, to revenge, to destroy is not a true attribute for a real man, if we refer it to human being. And revenge is displayed as more powerful thing than love, because even love cannot stop revenge from its destroying a person who chose it. The director of the film mercilessly destroyed the ideas of humanism, having carried them to our society. But in this way he strongly focuses on them, highly paying attention on the impossibility of their existence on the way the main character chose. Of course, the emphasized problem is always actual and very difficult. The difficulty is about what to do with a destroyed and changed life when society gives you 2 options - to follow it and substitute human concepts in which a man is a one who is able to kill and avenge (and degrade within), or to die from such concepts. No, a choice is always exists, but there is a very delicate balance between a right choice and those given options. Although the director told nothing in this film. This movie really impressed me, though I don't like violence on the screen.

Especially I admired Darren Healy's play done. It's a harsh and rough film but it can make you think much.