Who payed the critics

Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

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

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

I caught this on City TV last night (Feb 16th, 2008) when flipping through the channels, and even though I had missed the first 30 minutes of this film, I was compelled to stop on that channel and watch it! I found the plot to be riveting, I couldn't turn away! ***Please be warned my review contains spoilers - If you haven't seen the film yet, please stop reading now*** I was drawn in by several factors - the disintegration of Julie & Henry's relationship; the illness and impending death of their son; the mystical, magical "healer" character; the ensuing relationship between Julie & Alexei. I was so fascinated by all of these concepts unraveling at once! I kind of disliked how Alexei abruptly left, when he found he couldn't heal the boy. It begged so many questions, such as "Is it just THAT boy he cannot heal? Or has he totally lost his powers?", and "What made him lose his powers? Giving in to his desire for sex & love? Or did he lose his powers when he impregnated Julie? Did his healing 'force' leave his body through ejaculation?" Also, when the film cuts to the final scene, where Julie's pregnancy is obviously going along nicely, and even though their son's death is imminent, they appear to be a reunited, happy family again. Nothing was shown to describe how the family got back to this state again.. it begged more questions, such as "When & How did Julie & Henry get so friendly with each other again?" and "How did they let go of all of the bad feelings and bad blood between them, and become so loving again?" and "Is the baby going to have Alexei's healing powers?" But, even though I seem to prefer a film that "spells it all out" for me, I loved this film BECAUSE it begged all of those questions, BECAUSE it left me pondering, wondering, thinking, worrying... It truly IS a thought-provoking film and I love when I can watch a film and still be affected by it, and still be thinking about it, days later. This film is definitely one of those films!

The Polish director Agnieszka Holland offers a view about a family in turmoil caused by the illness of a young boy. This film was shown on the Sundance channel recently. Most of the comments submitted about this movie in this forum fail to give credit to Ms. Holland for this tale that blends mysticism, faith, science and betrayal that works well. Stop reading if you haven't seen the picture.Ms. Holland's film is complicated, in that it asks the viewer to think about how Julie's actions to save Nick, her young son, stricken with a rare cancer, clash with the medical science because she goes with her instincts instead, when she takes the boy to be seen by a folk "healer" in Poland. At the same time her marriage has come to an abrupt end when she learns her husband has betrayed her with another woman, in her own home.Julie sees an improvement when "the healer" selects Nick as his next project to help and asks her to follow him as he goes through the countryside seeing people. When Nicks starts showing signs of recovery, a mutual attraction develops between Julie and Alexei, the holy man. Julie goes home and Alexei follows her. Something is not quite right with Nick and when he has a relapse, Julie's faith in Alexei's ability to cure her son evaporates, thus ending their relationship, as Alexei abandons Julie.The film is well done and paced. It engrosses the viewer because Ms. Holland knows where she is taking us. At the end, when Alexei has left, we finally see some sense of harmony in Julie's life, depicted lovingly in the last sequence of the film. Nick, is still not well, but the family has come together by the experience they have been through and we see that Julie is expecting a child. It almost appears as though Nick will die, but there will be a new life in the family. In other words, the sacrifice of Nick's life for the miracle that is growing in Julie's womb.The movie owes a tremendous deal to the luminous presence of Miranda Otto, who does wonders with her depiction of Julie. Ms. Otto's face projects an intelligence that is uncanny. She makes us believe that she is this woman torn between the medicine that might help her young son, but does nothing, and to what extreme, as a mother, she will go to have Nick cured of the cancer that is killing him slowly.Lothaire Bluteau is the healer, Alexei. He gives an enigmatic performance that adds another layer to the film. In their scenes together, Mr. Bluteau and Ms. Otto do amazing acting. This Canadian actor's work is never dull; he projects a rare knack to make his characters believable and likable.Finally, William Fichtner, as Henry, is also excellent. He responds well to Ms. Holland's direction. The twins, played by Ryan Smith and Bianca Crudo are excellent without being bratty, or obnoxious.Ms. Holland's film will reward those who watch it with an open mind as she never passes judgment on what we are seeing on the screen.

'Julia Walking Home' is a movie in which too many sensible themes as faith, marriage troubles, religiosity, supernatural events and the fear of death are put together in a bundle by director Agnieska Holland. Maybe the great circle of matters is a problem to the final outcome but, in fact, the movie and its narrative are not conducted with sufficient strenght to make the viewer really involved with the drama. All the time the movie goes on and on and the story seems to be restrained and underdeveloped. There's too much artificialism in some points, like the relationship between Julie (Miranda Otto) and the miracle guy (Lothaire Bluteau, in a strange performance) who performs supernatural cures for all kind of diseases. The most strong impression, after all, is that life must be linked with strong morality and family values. In this point, I think Mr. Frank Capra could have been the director of this peasant, conventional and thoughtless little drama. The outocome - maybe - would be much better. I give this a 5 (five).

Life is complicated.There is no clear right or wrong.The deeds we hate on other people, may be done by us, when time comes. Humans don't always react in the most obvious ways.At many points in life, we have to make choices, where we gain something and we lose something. It is not usually obvious what choice is the best one.There is an ongoing tussle between heart and brain, the intellectual self and the emotional self, the worldly desire and larger than life desires... These are some of things I recall from my experience with the movie. It was indeed an experience. It was a very sensitive movie having complicated characters and their psychologies. It was one of those movies wherefrom anybody could take back anything that he/she relates to, more strongly. For example, one may think it was a movie about a woman's hypocrisies whereas others might that it was a movie on fighting till the last moment. Some might view it as justifying the supernatural. Its just how you view it.Although BASED ON A REAL LIFE STORY, and I never thought real life stories could be that surprising, its not the story that matters. Don't try to view the film based on the short story description. If you are into meaningful cinema which involves reflections from real life, a thought behind the movie, something that lets you ponder for quite sometime, this is the movie for you. And don't worry it will not be hard on you. Its softly told movie that will surely have an impact on you, positive or negative, who knows!