MoviePro.net

We have taken some photos of "Miracle at St. Anna". They represent actual movie quality.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Write your own review of Miracle at St. Anna movie and share your thoughts with other people.

• Two Hours And Forty Minutes posted on 20 August 2009

  Endless, unbearable. Italian actors overacting shamelessly and Spike Lee losing track of his own talents. The self indulgence mixed with the confusion made this "epic" one of the most difficult films to sit through in long, long time. During my visit to Los Angeles I was invited to a few screenings but this one was the one I longed for. Terrible let down. It's been a long time since "Do The Right Thing" and I have the feeling that it has to do with Spike Lee's vision of himself as a filmmaker. There is a lack of humility that blurs everything he does and "Miracle At St Anna" is a perfect example of that. In a way "The Inside Man", his genre commercial outing, was more honest and disciplined than anything his done of late. I can't imagine this film making any money so maybe Mr Lee will have the space to reflect. I certainly hope so because I'm sure he still has some aces up his sleeve.

• Bad In So Many Ways posted on 14 August 2009

  Spike Lee dropped the ball in so many ways. Casting that brought in mostly weak actors. Jerky scenes that have no bearing on the story line. What was really annoying was the "hook" in this film. The head that is continually carried throughout the entire film that was uneventful to the storyline. The over dramatic scenes of racial confrontations were preposterous. I really wanted to find this movie worth the 7 bucks that I dished out but alas! It was not the case. If Spike Lee would go back and watch Eastwood's film "Letters From Iwo Jima" again he would learn the elements of war were much better presented. If Spike Lee thought he was going to set the record straight about blacks serving in WWII he missed the target terribly. Many scenes fell apart. One example that stood out was the scene where a Nazi officer spares the life of one of the black soldiers and then hands him a loaded Lugar hand gun. Really now...Anyone going to buy that ridiculous scenario?

• Good story done in by the director posted on 08 October 2009

  I really wanted to like this movie. After 30 minutes I switched to something else. I revisited the film a few days later and watched the rest to the end and I am glad that I did. There is a good story in here. It just takes too long to get there. I absolutely agree with those who say it should have been a good 30 minutes shorter. I would love to sit down with Spike Lee and tell him why some scenes were not necessary or how they could have been shortened. It was like sitting through a sermon in church that took twice the time necessary to make the point. At some point it becomes self-defeating. HOWEVER, what bothered me most was the portrayal of black soldiers with a contemporary attitude. How much more powerful it would have been if Lee had portrayed the soldiers as they would have behaved in 1944, having to tolerate the open racism of "superior" officers and still go about the task of fighting for their country. The black soldiers in WWII were far more heroic and stoic than Spike Lee made them out to be. This could have been a powerful movie if Lee had honored historical facts rather than his anger.

• worst movie ever posted on 08 October 2009

  one of the worst war movies ever. undeveloped, unclear and a waste of money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it is a sad attempt against Saving Private Ryan (a great war movie). This movie is like Nazi torture. At the very least the weapons are historically correct. t\The director has no sense of action and the knowledge of what the viewers care about. DO NOT EVER EVER EVER EVER RENT BUY OR SEE THIS MOVIE. If you have seen the movie and you thought it was good then you are crazy or do not know a true war movie!!! The movie is not good for anything other than a shooting target. The director seems to only care about sending a message that he is the worst director known to man. DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE

• Why? posted on 08 August 2009

  Why would so many talented people get together to create such a mess? The intentions must have been good. The road to hell is paved with movies like this. Terrible script, wooden dialog, acting that ranges from overblown to underplayed, pretentious direction, gratuitous violence, and worst of all, a plot that meanders wildly from one story to the next.Normally even bad movies have some redeeming qualities. This movie really had few--some wonderfully sad moments, perhaps, and good local scenery. But when the only character who can act is eleven years old, and the only thing that brings any joy to the viewer is the movie's end, you know something is very wrong.

• I have two big white biscuits right here for you. posted on 08 August 2009

  Is this movie as bad as they say? Has Spike Lee lost focus? It garnered a lot of nominations, but no wins; what could be the matter? The opening was fascinating. There was going to be a story with multiple subplots that would make this an intelligent movie. Even Laila Petrone couldn't distract me as hard as she tried.The story shifts to a battle between the Germans and the Buffalo soldiers, which was outstanding, and, as expected, shows the prejudice of the white officers in command. Only four men escaped the artillery barrage. It was funny watching Train (Omar Benson Miller) dragging a head with him as a good luck talisman. Soon, he is also dragging an 8-year-old boy (Matteo Sciabordi).The story settles to life in town where various stories, including the explanation for the killing in the beginning, are told. Another big battle in town ends the story and brings us back to the present.Was it overly long? No, I found that it was compelling enough that the time flew by. It was a good war movie with a twist. I found it enjoyable.

• Bad in every asset of cinema posted on 08 August 2009

  This was only the second Spike Lee film I've ever seen, and I was shocked as to how terrible this movie was. Bad acting, TERRIBLE TERRIBLE script, bad directing, bad story in general. It contained a ton of clichés and unbelievable events.This really was an excellent idea for a movie, and I agree that there should be more stories told of the all-black divisions in WWII. Even the part of the movie with the sculpture could have been very interesting had a competent director been in charge of this movie.And in terms of racism, Spike Lee needs to realize that you don't combat racism with more racism, that's not how things work. He literally went out of his way (slowing down a slow story) in some parts, like the Nazi woman on the loudspeaker, to emphasize the racism. He ruined a potentially good movie to get out his close-minded ideas. It really was laughable in some parts.In conclusion, white or black, if you want to see a good thriller, war drama, or mystery, this is not what you want to watch. If you are an African-American who wants to get all hyped up on inaccurate black power propaganda, then this is certainly for you.

• Great directing but horrible story and slow as death posted on 08 June 2009

  I agree with most comments that it was very well directed but the story was very cliché and boring and slow moving...and highly unrealistic with the main character holding a gun at his postal office for so many years and ...why on earth would the Italian guy come to the USA.. i could see it working if he was an Italian postal worker.. now that would have some logic to it.Otherwise if you remove spike lee...and put another director ..it would be rating much lower since the story is not that compelling.. and yes, the ending was quite trite and over acted nice for a Sunday afternoon but nothing to compare with Saving Private Ryan or other great flicks.

• Lee Film Highlights Forgotten Soldiers posted on 08 June 2009

  Miracle at St. Anna is the latest film from director Spike Lee. It is his first war movie, and arguably only the second action-based thriller after 2007's Inside Man. The WWII period film actually opens in the early 80's: A post-office clerk (Laz Alonso) abruptly shoots a customer with a vintage military pistol. An ensuing police investigation finds an Italian stone bust worth millions in the suspect's apartment. A rookie reporter (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) prods him about it, and the main narrative begins: in 1944, four black men, members of the 92nd Infantry "Buffalo Soldiers" fight their way behind enemy lines in Axis-controlled Italy. They include the towering Train (Omar Benson Miller), level-headed Stamps (Derek Luke), preacher turned apostate Bishop (Michael Ealy), and Afro-Latin/de facto translator Hector (Alonso). Train obsessively carries the aforementioned bust, retrieved from a previous battle.The quartet manages to find shelter in the Italian village of St. Anna- locals there include partisans who fight against the Nazis. The group also looks after an injured Italian boy (Matteo Sciabordi) with a dark secret, whose foreign tongue and vivid imagination endears him to the God-fearing Train. Meanwhile, resident cynic Bishop frequently butts heads with Stamps, not just over orders but in getting the attention of the pretty Renata (Valentina Cervi).The narrative touches on the conflict and the comfort that the soldiers manage to find in the sleepy village: A Nazi radio broadcast mocks the soldiers' plight as they fight for a country that won't allow them to be served at a restaurant (a scene at an American ice cream parlor illustrates this, with a twist); the group openly dance and flirt with local women, and debate whether their efforts will truly have any impact back home. Conflict with a racist commanding officer threatens to undermine everything as Nazis march toward the town.Lee adapted Miracle at St. Anna from James McBride's 2004 novel, who also wrote the screenplay. The film even manages to offer some quasi-sympathetic Nazis- one, an officer (who likes to read poetry) whose complaints about lack of food and supplies falls on deaf ears; another, a soldier who balks at slaughter of civilians. The cinematography from Matthew J. Libatique is at least as sympathetic as Ernest Dickerson's was to Lee's early work. Lots of wide shots are seen of the Italian countryside, giving scope to how overwhelmed and isolated the four protagonists are.The film lingers a little too long in a few scenes with the villagers and a sub-plot involving a traitor among the partisans, and a court trial epilogue ends rather abruptly, but overall the story is extremely engaging, a portrait of men who sacrificed greatly not only for their country but for a community that was not afforded the same human rights that were being defended on the world stage.

• Problems midst those supposedly on the "SAME" side in a War = posted on 08 April 2009

  I had an uncle LAURIE who'd been an American PILOT fighting the Axis in Italy in World War II. He'd once commented to me that, tho a number of his fellow pilots were fairly racist & disliked working with the all-black American TUSKEGEE AIRMEN,he'd found them to be EXCELLENT pilots & was always PLEASED to have them helping out on missions. That same basic WWII racism is at the heart of Spike Lee's new movie about a company of black SOLDIERS fighting and getting caught behind enemy lines in northern Italy. DEREK Luke plays Staff Sgt Stamps; MICHAEL EALY is Sgt Cummings; LAZ ALONZO is Cpl Negron; & OMAR BENSON MILLER (also in the soon-to-open "THE EXPRESS") is Pvt Train (around whom the story sort of revolves). The movie has some unnecessary scenes (& length to some)-- but it's a very EFFECTIVE, hard-hitting and thought-provoking story of some of the difficulties faced in the way people of different nations and attitudes fight for their own country and its then-current supposed political goals.

• After This Disaster, Spike Lee Needs to Keep His Mouth Shut posted on 31 July 2009

  This God-awful mess of a movie is the last piece of proof I need to convince me that Spike Lee is pretty much worthless as a filmmaker.I have to believe that critics who gave this film even the faintest praise were merely being respectful to its subject matter and the intentions behind it. Because everything else about it is quite horrible. It's one of those movies that gets worse the more you think about it.Lee jumbles together a mish-mosh of stories into a WWII epic about the experiences of black soldiers on the front lines. The trouble is, the film isn't really about the black experience, or anything else for that matter. Oh there are some scenes of blacks being treated poorly by their white commanders, and one lengthy scene shoe-horned into the film that shows them being mistreated in an ice cream parlor back in the states, but these scenes feel as if they were inserted arbitrarily. It's as if Lee felt the need to meet a quota of obligatory racial diatribe, not like he included these scenes because they sprang organically from the story. In fact, the racial overtones become almost an afterthought under the weight of countless tangential plot lines involving Italian freedom fighters, a little boy "adopted" by one of the Americans, a traitor, a love triangle, and a valuable historical artifact. The last plot line in particular sets the stage for a clunky framing narrative set in 1983 that gives John Leguizamo, John Turturro and Joseph Gordon-Levitt pointless cameos and ends the film with one of the most embarrassingly clumsy scenes I've ever seen.What makes me most angry about Lee is his public arrogance and pomposity. He seeks to deflate the myth of the American war hero and call to task all of those famous WWII films ("The Longest Day" specifically makes an appearance in the film) for ignoring the black soldiers who served their country as ably as the whites. Fair enough. But then he makes a terrible movie that can't even get the war part right. Every battle scene in this feels like rejected footage from "Saving Private Ryan." If you're going to shoot off your mouth and claim that you can do it better, you better damn well be sure you can. It's that quality about Spike Lee that makes me actually enjoy seeing a movie like this fail when I otherwise might meet it with a shrug of indifference.I've given Lee lots of chances to impress me with his film-making abilities, and this movie was beyond strike three. He's out.Grade: D

• Disappointment posted on 29 July 2009

  Oh my! I am a big fan of Spike Lee, but this had to be one of his worst films yet. I think it should be edited again and the acting needed to be directed better. It was very choppy. I found myself losing interest in the film until the end. The comedy in the film ruined the script and I found the dialect between the soldiers unbelievable for the time period. Some of the slang terms used were out of place. The acting was much to be desired. The characters did not draw the viewer in. The war scenes were shot odd. I went to the theater expecting a masterpiece, especially after fifty million, but things seemed to fall apart quickly and if I wasn't a Lee fan, I would have given up in the beginning. The script was very weak. I believe the strongest characters were Luke,even though his character wasn't given much dialect to work with, and Miller. Miller's character was questionable at times, however his relationship with Sciabordi saved the film. I believe if it wasn't for their relationship, I would have drifted into a deep deep sleep. The flashbacks were useless and the film should have began with the church flashback in real time. This would have added a bit more interest. The flashback of the soldiers in the US was a complete waste of time due to the fact that the racism and JIM crow laws that existed at the time were introduced by the NAZI speaker when they were in battle.Overall, I was disappointed in this film. I was disappointed in the acting and the choices the actors chose. The character development wasn't owned. I think filmmakers should really allow anonymous feedback at their previews before releasing films so that another edit can be done. This would have cut out 45 minutes and a couple of the unnecessary scenes that ruined the film.

• Not Happy posted on 19 July 2009

  As a black man who fully believes in black pride and progress, I must say I am truly disappointed with spike lee's new movie right now. I don't know where to begin in regards to expressing my disappointment but I will try. Considering how spike tries to come off as being very afro-centric, his portrayal of black characters was very insulting. There were so many typical blacks in film stereotypes in the movie that I just shook my head most of the time. For instance you had a black man with a gold tooth and stocking cap on, another that was enormous in size but brainless and country, and then to put the cherry on top the 2 guys are fighting over a white woman they met like 2 days ago and kept drooling over. Contrary to popular belief most of the white American soldiers didn't look like the actors in the movies made in the 50's and 60's. The actors looks were ploy to just associate good looks and chivalry with American soldiers in order to build moral for soldiers when they left and came home and to keep ppl interested in the movie. Another thing that really bothered me was that black films don't always need to be funny or trying to evoke laughter. This movie was suppose to be dramatic touching upon a serious subject and should have been directed in the same manner. Then the scoring of the movie was horrible. Even the little parts where he tries to show difference between African Americans and black puerto ricans was off and unnecessary. During that time those hispanics that were black or mulatto didn't try to act like there was a difference between the 2 other than language and maybe certain foods because they faced the same discriminations in PR, DR, and CUBA as in the US. These are just some of the issues I had with this movie. I think antoine faqua, who did training day and arthur, should have done this movie. I am just waiting now to see the mockery of hannibal that vin diesel does.

• Likely Underrated-- very minor spoilers posted on 17 July 2009

  I was surprised to see how poorly rated this film was. In a pair of scenes the film seemed a little disjointed and preachy about the African American experience in the 40s and World War II. It's not so much that these scenes were poorly done, and certainly not that they didn't express the irony of serving a county that didn't fully value you. It's more that the scenes didn't seem to fit with the plot. Other scenes, though, came across strong and believable within the film-- including tearing down racist Nazi propaganda aimed at the native Italians about Buffalo troops.Excepting this minor flaw, though, I found the film compelling, interesting, and true to the horror of all wars (something we need reminding of again whenever we are at war-- since some will always be surprised atrocities will _always_ occur on both sides). Moreover, Spike Lee tells the story through a unique narrative frame, and evokes great performances from both English-speaking and Italian-speaking actors. I was engrossed, emotionally taken, and totally surprised to emerge (still deep in thought) to find the film was a full 3 hours long with previews. It was never slow or excessive in length. I am reminded both of the army service part of Forrest Gump and of Pan's Labrinth.

• INTENSE! **Spoilers** posted on 15 July 2009

  WOW! What a ride! Okay. First of all, this is not a perfect film, but few are. Still, it is an EXCELLENT film. It gets slow in the middle. A good 20 minutes could have been trimmed from the middle of the film. I think this is something Spike Lee seriously needs to work on as a filmmaker.With that said, outside of that "dead zone" is true intensity. Its great to see a film that finally acknowledges the Black troops from WWII. The last time I recall a major theatrical film even admitting they existed was when I saw "A Soldier's Story" back in the 1980's. But this film goes far beyond a preachy "Black" movie that a lot of people seem to fear. It is a very balanced study of human nature.Spike Lee does a great job of flawed people - Black, Italian, and German - wrestle with their consciences. But we also see people of all three groups rise to harrowing challenges, and perform heroically.The slight lull in the middle is more than made up for by the action-packed latter third of the film, and rich character studies throughout.This film reminds us of how brutal fascism can be, and at the same time pays tribute to those (of various ethnicities) who stood up to it, and sacrificed themselves in the process.It is unfortunate that so many saw fit to give this film such low ratings. A balanced portrayal of all people doesn't always leave us feeling comfortable. But maybe we can look in the mirror for few moments, and learn from the positives and negatives alike.To Spike Lee: Well done!

• Wasn't the best, but moved me to tears at points. posted on 13 July 2009

  Yes, I am a bit of a softy, but some parts in this film moved me to tears. And although some of it was over the top, I think the 1940's were over the top. Were living in a time where we throw around this "Stereotype" or that "sterotype" well those stereotypes came from somewhere and the 40's was a simple time thrown into an extreme situation. The men of that time were not on information overload. The scenes that seemed thick with stereotypical acting, I can say I believe that there was a person just like that back then. If it was set now, "No Way" but in the forties. Yes. The simpleton, Christ evoking country bumpkon. The street hood who doesn't care about anyone but himself, but at time we can see that he does. The ideological, hopeful young black man who wants to impress the bigger worlds. The Puerto Rican who fits, but doesn't quite fit. I can see it all then...now...no. As far as Black men lusting over white woman. Why not? I am a white man who would lust over black woman if I was stuck in Africa and plenty did. I think that was truthful. All and all, some of this film was slow, and sometimes felt strained and as if thirty minutes could have been cut from it...but I enjoyed it nonetheless.

• Great Story, But Execution Could Have Been Better posted on 13 July 2009

  Let me begin by saying that this movie was okay. But it could have been way better.The story itself is great and kept me interested until the end, but it's execution could have been much better. Throughout the movie, some of the acting ranged from good to bad to downright lame. Jon Turturro's cameo as a detective was extremely disappointing, for instance. The acting picks up when the flashback begins, but every so often it rockets down.The battle scenes were, for lack of a better word, comical. They were over the top and stereotypical of any other war movie, complete with bodies being flung from explosions in an exaggerated fashion and people sobbing over amputated rubber limbs.The characters were all over the place on the sympathy scale. Stamps and Trey (or is it Train?) elicit plenty of sympathy, whereas Bishop and whatever the girl's name was only brought out anger from me.The worst part of the movie is the editing, though. Some of the battle scenes are choppy, and there are entire cuts to different scenes for split seconds that we could have done without (they serve no purpose whatsoever).My biggest problem was the stereotypical racism of the white characters in the movie. The only American white people in the movie are shown as black-hating jerks who's ignorance leads them to destruction.Overall, the movie was good. Not amazing, not great, definitely not a masterpiece, but it wasn't terrible or bad or crappy. It was a great story, but it could have been executed much better.6.5 Stars.

• I wanted to like it. posted on 07 November 2009

  As a real sucker for WW2 movies , I looked forward to Miracle at St. Anna. But after a few scenes , I knew that watching this very long film was going to test my patience. It felt as though Mr. Lee was daring his audience to like it. It never establishes a consistent tone. One moment it's Private Ryan and a few moments later it's Gomer Pyle. The score was distracting and way out of place with the scene through most of the movie. Editing was amateurish at best and some scenes went on way too long. The actors were adequate and I must place all of the blame on the director. A real missed opportunity on Spike Lee's part to tell a story that should be told and in a manner deserving of the material.

• This movie was awful.. posted on 07 March 2009

  I'm sorry but I really could not get into this movie. It's 2 hours and 40 minutes of rambling story that goes nowhere, the acting is mediocre at best and the story is not compelling. I agree that the actors are 1 dimensional and even though I wasn't expecting much, it really was worse than I had feared. I really have little respect for Spike Lee. He's just another angry black man who sees everything in Black and White. I loved Do The Right Thing and Inside Man, but aside from that fuggedaboudit!! When I went to see Saving Private Ryan I did not go hoping to see a great White war movie, I went to see a great war movie. Same thing with any movie I see. Making a movie with a poor story line just to represent blacks does not do it for me. I'd rather stay home and avoid it like all the bad movies with mostly white actors. I really think Spike Lee was sitting around one day and all of a sudden thought "Hey I need to make a movie about WWII with all brothers to get back at The Man!".. haha.. he is so ridiculous. So yea, there are war movies with African-Americans portrayed, for example I've never seen an all-White Vietnam war movie. Based on how few WWII movies were made between the 70s and late 90s, I don't think Spike is completely off-base for feeling left out, but making a movie like Miracle at St. Anna is simply showing a complete lack of talent and vision. Spike, watch Glory if you're interested in good film-making that emphasizes blacks in a positive light.

• Don't hate the playa, hate the game posted on 23 June 2009

  I don't understand why we cant all be friends. Am I missing something? I found this film to be, well, entertaining. I didn't have a problem with the acting. I ve never been in a fire-fight, but I felt the action scenes were, professional. I didn't think the Italians emoted anymore than, Italians do. I think most people had a tendency to be more overtly racist in the 1940s- we are talking pre-Dr. King era.Spike is one of the few artists I give a pass to for their use of magical realism. Shakespeare used anachronisms too, you know.Whys everybody hating on Spike? Is the film not true to its source material? James McBride is a celebrated memoirist/autobiographer. He did write THE COLOR OF WATER, right? Had I seen this film in '08 it wouldve made my top ten list. Then again, my wife and I always say, a bad Spike Lee joint is better than 99% of the Hollywood fare out there. Holla!