studebaker: i've never seen this movie, but certain of your criticisms stuck in my craw. first of all, please think about what you mean by "overacting." i've heard acting defined as truthful behavior in imaginary circumstances, a simple explanation for a highly demanding craft. if by overacting, you mean behavior that rings false to you because you don't believe the actor or actress really believes what they're saying, then you and i have no quarrel. but if you find any display of extreme emotion to be overacting, you might as well accuse the actor of "overliving." as to the "poor behavior" of the characters, remember that the fulcrum of drama is conflict. conflict is one person wanting one thing and another wanting the opposite. if you want something badly enough, or are terrified of losing it, you're not always going to behave like an eagle scout. can you imagine anything duller (aside from my comments) than a movie called "two hours of appropriate behavior"? we go to plays and movies to see people solve seemingly insurmountable problems the best way they can, not do volunteer work at a hospital. if you don't believe me, read a little Shakespeare.
Review of Man on Fire
