People are voting emotionally.

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Admirable film.

Blistering performances.

Ivans xtc is shot with slow shutter speeds and no 'tripod', with the result that it looks like a documentary - but it's not. Add to that some superb acting performances and the result is an extremely credible fiction film. One reviewer here complains of a lack of wisdom; I wasn't looking for wisdom. I was just watching a film about some very believable characters and what happened in a short section of their lives. Yes, it was interesting and gripping. It was also supported by some magnificent music, including excerpts of Richard Wagner's Tristan. I cannot recommend this film highly enough.

Rare to find a film with this much heart and integrity, especially one about the 'insider' world of Hollywood.Brilliant performances too. And humour.The death of Ivan Beckman is the most moving death I've ever seen on celluloid. And the guy's a Hollywood agent!Some really fresh touches in the way it's directed as well.

Rule #645: All films made in Hollywood, by Hollywood, about Hollywood, must be seedy. I should probably add ‘for Hollywood' to the above list, as the film is more or less a home movie. Like The Player, Sunset Boulevard and countless others before it, it is a film that has been made by locals and just happened to have been given a world-wide release; seemingly by accident. It also takes great delight in detailing what a dreadful, decadency, drug and sex-fuelled level of hell it is. Personally, I can't wait to go there.Although based on an original novel, its structure is different and only the central idea has been ‘borrowed.' Danny Huston plays (and rather well) an agent who manages to land a big, starry client and discover that he has cancer, all in the space of a few days. It's all downhill from then on as he begins to reassess his life, realises his girlfriend is just after his business connections and that he has barely achieved anything of worth in his short life. To be honest, that really doesn't come through in the film and feels as if it could have done with a few more scenes and some sharper editing. Despite some excellent scenes, the characters seem too much like improvised teaching studies and not well-written, three-dimensional people. Only Ivan manages to leap from the screen, and that is largely because of Danny Huston's Jack Nicholson-like presence.Another thing to note is that the film was shot with digital cameras, although the sound seems to have been recorded with a Dictaphone. The photography is good, but is soft and jittery. This is because it was shot interlaced and not in progressive scan. Given the quality of the cameras available, and its inevitable transfer to film, I'm not quite sure why. Techno-bore detail, I know, but still distracting.A good effort, but a home movie: 6/10

Again, we have a literary masterpiece "adapted" to the big screen (e.g., the recent "Bartleby"). Not a total success, in my opinion. First of all its transformed setting...the Hollywood scene...while the film creates its reality fairly well...is far from the original characterization of a public servant (a magistrate) and his powerful, reflective downward path to death. Secondly, the depiction of the movie business as superficial and full of back=slapping and phony relationships is a rehash to the point of cliche.That said, Danny Huston's performance as the high-living Hollywood agent, facing his imminent death is very convincing and even moving at times...and creates sympathy for an otherwise vacuous character. We are spared none of the grim details of his last days on earth...so be warned.