It's All About Love (2003)

This is the greatest movie I have ever seen. I have seen a lot of them, and found a great many to contain multiple layers (institute benjamenta, 2046) with multiple meanings and various viewpoints that the viewer can take. It was artists like these, like Peter Greenaway, who continually inform me on how film (as an artists tool) has evolved over time and each suggesting that it is a possibility of using story elements simply as chapter headings or function as a period, comma, parenthesis, bracket, or rather something marginalized in contrast with its real themes, content, or subjects.This is not a movie unsure of itself, it is a masterwork to be absolutely sure. And it is far beyond its time... it's all about love.

This film is poor, unconvincing and boring. What a waste of good actors! What were they thinking to take part in this drivel? There are plot holes to drive a train through and contradictions such as "is there a telephone?" when he uses a cell phone in another scene. Among other inconsistencies there are poles who don't appear to speak Polish and a champion ice skater who smokes. Does the director really think that, in the future, smoking won't be a thing of the past?Having said all that I can think of about this truly dreadful waste of time, I have to add that Joaquin Phoenix is one of my favorite actors and was the main reason I began to watch this garbage.

...and alas, this movie doesn't really have one. I was shocked to discover the director took an alleged two years to write the script. I think he must have used the same writing technique William Burroughs did gluing phrases together more or less at random to create Naked Lunch. In other words, the artist without any borders whatever may create a masterwork, but more likely will create a stillborn work.Now to be sure, if one thinks hard enough about "what it all means," the theme of compassion (or actually the decreasing amount of compassion) between human beings works. Ugandans "flying" away from earth is (or could be) a symbol for Ugandans so forgotten by the world that they no longer can stand on it. Sounds heavy, and maybe it would have worked except that particular symbol is only mentioned a couple times in passing and never developed into anything.Mr. Morrison... an allusion to Jim Morrison, the perhaps iconic art nihilist? Maybe. Isn't this fun? Or / and is Mr. Morrison symbolic of death, an interpretation we're surely offered nearer the end of the movie. Or not.Everyone's stepping over dead bodies, who died for lack of love (compassion). This did appeal to me, and impacted me in a lasting way, despite again being merely a prop rather than a developed part of the story.Filming was beautiful. Joakin Phoenix, Sean Penn, Clare Danes all tried admirably to invest their characters with depth, and oddly succeeded, as did Douglas Henshall (whom I remember for his great performance in "Orphans," a memorable and unique movie with a definite plot!). But the story, the story, the story...I didn't waste my time watching this... not totally, at least. I mourned, however, what could have been. This strange wreck could have been magnificent... but it really is all about plot.

I watched it and I could not make sense of any of it. He wants a divorce, she is career driven and does not want to be "replaced" but wants to stay married and committed to this man and wants to escape with him??? So confusing and all over the board! There is no point to this movie. It was written in 2 1/2 yrs? If that is true, the author never went back to review where his story was going before committing to a forward plot line! When he did, an eraser was not an option, but trying to explain it with another confusing plot twist was. Not worth the cellulose it was filmed on or the paper the script was printed on. The movie Sahara had better continuity and believability! Do not waste your time, enough people have already.