Comments on: Review: Overwrought ‘The Impossible’ Drowns In A Sea Of Melodrama

By: Alan B

Alan B — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:29:44 +0000

God, this review is insulting! Kevin Jagernauth can barely write a news piece without appearing ignorant and shallow, so the idea that he's taken it upon himself to be THE MORAL GUARDIAN FOR ALL NON-CAUCASIANS is a joke. There are many approaches to art criticism, but "this movie is bad because it's not the movie I wanted" isn't a valid one. The approach is egotistical, obnoxious and says far more about the critic than it could ever possibly say about the film.

By: David

David — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:29:44 +0000

This review sucks balls. I've been in a perilous situation similar to this in SE Asia, and when you're in it, the last thing on your mind is "man, these locals don't have flood insurance, now THAT'S a real tragedy." My biggest complaint with this movie was the score (it goes way overboard, piling on the melodrama), but these characters and the scope of this story are both genuine and true. Impressive. If you'd like a more sweeping account of the tsunami's impact on that entire region, I believe there was an HBO movie years ago that would service that need. In the meantime, this is a story about one family being torn apart by a force of nature and trying to survive the aftermath long enough to find each other again. Again, I wish the score didn't end up undermining the drama by being such a self-parody. The story and performances are visceral enough.

By: kal

kal — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:29:44 +0000

It was the story of one family's experience of what happened. It wasn't a film about the disaster as a whole. Having been to the area a year before and being a father, I found every minute of the film utterly compelling and harrowing. Whether the family were Spanish or British is neither here nor there; those things happened to that family and it was 'impossible' how they all found each other. Again it was their story and it was extremely well told. This was not insulting to anyone. The film makers didn't have them stay behind and help because it didn't happen. They had travel and health insurance- well send them to hell! What ridiculous comments.

Should we also criticse Paul Greengrass and United 93 for not focusing on the thousands who died in the towers rather than the passengers on the plane?

By: stacey

stacey — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:29:44 +0000

i completely agree with Kevin Jagernauth. i was definitely moved by the entire movie and thought the special effects were great, but being southeast asian and having experienced a massive flooding similar to the tsunami… As i watched the film throughout, i couldnt help but feel a lot of pain for all the locals who didnt have insurance and privileges the white family had. especially when they rushed maria through the hospital and she got a private room. in a normal circumstance during a tragic time in a country such as thailand – that would never happen! the hospital would have been much much more chaotic than that and finding space to operate is rare.

another thing that annoyed me, was in the last 10 minutes after maria gets out of surgery – the family is greeted by a fancy suited representative from their insurance company and rushed to to a private jet with first class seats!

as they were walking towards their private jet, lucas notices all the chaos still happening around them. i thought if this movie had any sense of ethics, they would have lucas say "wait! lets stay and help!" so the audience can really see the tragic and real truth about the event.

By: Mary

Mary — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:29:44 +0000

Oh and the other man searching for his family was not portrayed by Dominic Power (who is also in the film, just not in the role that this massively flawed and inaccurate, under researched article says he is). The other man I believe is played by SÃ¶nke MÃ¶hring.

By: Mary

Mary — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:29:44 +0000

I thought the film was great. The film focuses on a real story with characters based on real people. The reason it didn't focus on the locals is because wasn't about the locals. Obviously what happened to locals and for that matter everyone affected matters but you can't put all of that in a film. It was about one family and what THEY saw and experienced not what we all saw in the newspapers. I agree perhaps other stories should be told, but in a different film. Also this is massively insulting to Ewan McGregor and Naomi Watts, suggesting they are only in the film because they are attractive or because they are Hollywood stars, regardless of the fact they both happen to be outstanding actors at the absolute top of their profession.

By: Cruella

Cruella — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:29:44 +0000

no escaping the fact that focussing on white middle class people in this film is somewhat insulting to the area its set and the locals it mainly effected in such a devastating way. Who are they supposed to relate to when they watch this movie?

By: JOHN

JOHN — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:29:44 +0000

So the review basically is "The lead cast are white people so I can't care about them." Yikes.
I thought the film was great and the first 30-40 minutes are some of the most powerful I've seen. Brutal stuff.

By: Wallace

Wallace — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:29:44 +0000

I think anyone who isn't moved by this movie should get their chest checked to make sure they actually have a heart.