Unlimitedia Sick Product of a Sick System

Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Tayloriona Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

ga-bsi This isn't the best anti-war/ Vietnam film that I've watched, but it's a good solid effort that keeps you entertained and holds your attention for an hour and a half. The cast gives good steady performances with the exception of the actress who plays Sutherland's mother, her character comes across as weak and vaguely vacant. Robert Downey Jr is brilliant as usual, with comic yet tragic and self destructive portrayal of Ralph. Keifer Sutherland is gentle and romantic in his role, a perfect match for Downey's dysfunctional eccentricities. The scene in which Downey takes two LSD tablets then has a seizure is very powerful, especially after Ryder's tremulous speech at her graduation. The film's end is satisfying and manages not to be over the top or sappy, but rather a good emotional moment with a powerful end voice over from Sutherland.

cicero The reviews of "1969" as cinema are largely right on--it's a neat "little" movie and a credible directorial debut.But it's subtext, the radicalization of the mainstream view is uncannily germane to our present situation in 2007; the basic theme of the screenplay translates to "dissent is not unpatriotic; indeed, it is an obligation in a democracy..". The "clicheing" of antiwar sentiments in so many other (especially post-1994) films (especially the notion that anti-Vietnam sentiment was the province of drug-clouded hippies and committed anarchists and the Left) is teased apart in a series of "proxy" vignettes about a university building takeover, a draft-office break-in, and a Marine KIA funeral. These are set against a backdrop of not-so cliché themes of value evolution and generational conflict, handled in a manner that warrants re-visitation.I saw this film about 15 years ago, and was impressed by Sutherland (at 19-as 19 !)) and Downey--and Dern. But now, the film has a message. Biggest drawback for me--soundbite use of terrific 1969-era rock for the soundtrack--great music--in bits and pieces....

MisterWhiplash I only watched 1969 late night one night because the title indicated to me that it might be a film dealing with the issues of the time in the year with sincerity or promise, or even as a documentary. I didn't know how the film would go after the first couple of scenes I saw, but Bruce Dern seemed formidable enough to keep a watch. When the credits started to roll though I thought to myself, "what a cliché ridden disaster this became, why did I stick with it?" I guess I stayed tuned because the actors seemed promising enough- Dern in a supporting role as a hard-nosed father, his son in the lead played by Kiefer Sutherland, his cocky best friend played by Robert Downey Jr., and his beautiful sister played by Winona Ryder. Sutherland's character, Scott, decides he doesn't want to go to Vietnam like his brother, so he enlists into college with Downey's character, Ralph, and the two begin to discover what they've been sheltered from- free-love, drugs, and soon enough sex. Some of these early scenes seemed to look kind of silly, but I enjoyed the (partly obvious) soundtrack and thought if I stayed with picture (instead of flipping to a different, better movie) it might pay off in the second or third act. I got proved wrong, as line after line and moment after moment seemed to lower my expectations, and the characters headed towards an last scene that made me want to puke in my lap.The probable cause of the pits in this movie come from writer/director Ernest Thompson. I don't know who he is really, and I haven't seen any of his other efforts as a filmmaker, but it looked as though he was either tapping into his own by-the-numbers first account of the turmoil that went with coming of age in that year, or was tapping into the memories of other baby boomer yuppies who still try to think back to when they wanted freedom before gluing themselves into the "me" generation. The players tried to do what they could, a couple of scenes had some laughs, and I grinned at a line or two from Downey Jr. Yet I couldn't get over how much the movie hit its well intentioned points home with near propagandizing techniques. To sum it up, this is absolutely the soapy, "made-for-television" version of what life was like in 1969. If you want the truer, earthy version(s) see Woodstock or Easy Rider - those two may be folklore at this point for that generation, but at least they work as being entertaining thirty-four years later to the following generation. Grade: D

Paul Weissman Mediocre film about two young men coming of age in the title year. The acting is fine, obviously, considering the cast, but the script and direction pummels every point home with all the subtlety of a good Pete Townshend guitar smash. P.S.- - any scene in any film that uses the opening stanzas of the Hendrix version of "All Along the Watchtower" gets your adrenaline flowing. Didja ever notice that? (It happens once here)