Powerful

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

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.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Today I saw Ferrara's "Mary" for the third time and still was not able to get under its chameleon skin. There are some characteristics which I'm almost sure of. It's provocative. It boasts raising relevant questions which need not be considered solely religious. It indulges in emotional hyperboles bordering on kitsch. (Whitaker's endless monologue reminded me of Keitel's repeated howling in "Bad Lieutenant", similarly torturous and ridiculous at the same time.) It's structurally sophisticated, visually appealing, and probably honest .... But I can't get the message. Or to be more precise : I am not quite sure that this critical treatise on modern life + values is more than a cheap sermon in the end.Mary is the key figure within my dilemma. I wonder if the director would admit the possibility that she, too, is an erring child of her time - neurotic, confused, prone to self-delusion while searching for truth/meaning of life .... The shots of the fishing boat in the final segment (including that suite of Semitic beauties at dawn !) seem very questionable to me.One of my favourite reviewers, Mr. Ekkehard Knoerer, doubts whether the director and his screenwriters actually know what they want and do. I don't know either ; but then again, sometimes it's better not to know.

It is really hard to understand what kind of message this film is supposed to convey. We have several threads of story that start and seem to lead nowhere. Juliette Binoche is an actress who after acting as Mary in a film about the life of Jesus is struck by religious fervor and apparently starts identifying herself wit the the Bible character. Forest Whitaker is a religious TV host who does not seem to care to much about God, but when disaster strikes his personal life he remembers Him and starts praying and believing - are we supposed to believe as viewers that this sincere? The film about Jesus starts some kind of controversy which seems to refer to Mel Gibson, but the real Mel Gibson as much as I may not like him is certainly sincere in his beliefs, and does not look like the cynical character in this film. Although 'Mary' lasts only 83 minutes the screen time is too long, so it is filled up with scenes of the biblical story (from the film in the film, or trying to convey some confuse metaphor? who cares?) and an episode of a Jewish Passover celebration in Jerusalem interrupted by an act of terror with no connection whatever with the rest of the story.It is hard to grasp why this film was made, what is it really trying to say and why actors like Juliette Binoche and the now-Oscared Forest Whitaker got involved with it. They act well, but it's wasted talent. Unless you are a fan of Bible inspired films, there is no good reason to spend the time seeing it.

During the 80's and 90's,director Abel Ferrara was one of the leaders of the independent cinema making amazing films which challenged the spectator.But,his recent works are far away from his previous works.New Rose Hotel and R Xmas were a little bit disappointing but they were interesting experiments.But,I do not know what was Ferrara thinking when he was making Mary,a tedious and boring movie and,by my point of view,a huge let down in his career.During 83 minutes,the movie shows us three stories which are totally boring and uninteresting.I think Ferrara wanted to make an analysis about the religion but,still with that,I think he had to do a better work to make a coherent connection between the stories.For me,it is very disappointing that Ferrara,who made excellent films with very little resources(like,for example,Bad Lieutenant,The Addiction,Ms.45 and The Body Snatchers),was behind this crap.I hope Mary is only an unexplainable false move in Ferrara's career and that,he will get redeemed soon.But I cannot recommend Mary,which is a tedious film.

It seems like Juliette Binoche is trying to compete with Orson Welles, who received joint third billing in The Third Man in return for about 8 minutes screen time. Here Binoche draws top billing and gets to work about ten or twelve minutes. It's very possible that without her prominent billing this wouldn't draw flies. Sure, the usual suspects, the Festival crowd who like to award prizes to worthless material - check L'Esquive if you don't believe me - have appeared out of the woodwork at Venice but I was part of an audience of eight and most of those I suspect were sheltering from the snow that fell on Paris earlier today. Perhaps it's me but I couldn't detect much of a reason for actually making this. After the hackneyed opening - the rolling of the rock only to discover the body of Jesus is no longer there and a director yelling 'cut' to let us know it's only a film - director/actor Matthew Modine tells Binoche it's time to go back to NY, just like that maybe two minutes after completing the scene, no wrap party, no packing, nothing! only for her to announce she's splitting and leaving for Jerusalem like now, Man. Okay, she's been profoundly affected by perhaps months of filming and immersing herself in the role of Mary Magdalene but we have to take that on trust. After that we get dragged into the story of Forest Whittaker, a celebrity TV interviewer who just happens to be making a series of programmes on Religion and hardly ever gets back to his pregnant wife who, in the real world, instead of yelling at him would be down at the studio because as a celebrity he surely has enough clout to have his wife there. There's lots of talk and I mean TALK, endless, meaningless and in between Binoche wanders around Jerusalem looking cute as Amalie but ultimately this is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying ... nothing.