Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

A waste of 90 minutes of my life

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Great movie. It really galls me how far double speak and rewritten history, as potrayed in 1984, has eminated into 2018 America. I'm referring to the reviews that proclaim we are now in "1984" because of President Trump and his supporters. The exact opposite is true. Any sophomore should know that the Socialism potrayed in 1984 is a product of the left. Big government, tje destruction of religion and the family are all goals if Marx and Socialism. It is very scary how deep we've sunk.

I can't believe I put myself though watching this garbage. The story line is vague at best and amounts to nothing but drivel.

When a US Presidential spokesperson recently used the term alternative facts to explain away inconsistencies between the White House version of truth and objectively verified truth it triggered a global revival of interest in the George Orwell classic Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949). Single- handedly, the term alternative facts caused a run on the 68-year old novel and led to cinemas across America re-screening the 1984 film adaptation. Acknowledged as one of the most important literary works of the modern era, 1984 has been adapted to film, television, radio, stage, music, and other popular culture platforms and it continues to resonate as a contemporary dystopian warning about how power can be used as a weapon to crush truth.The film's plot line, setting and acting are starkly minimalist. Oceania is an imaginary futuristic totalitarian society that is in ruins from perpetual war. The people are under constant surveillance and there are screens everywhere broadcasting propaganda that keeps the masses devoted to leader Big Brother. The Party controls everything, including human thought and the facts of history. The masses must publicly demonstrate their loyalty to Big Brother, personal relationships are banned, and any ideas contrary to Party Policy are thought-crimes punishable by death.The film's protagonist, Winston Smith (John Hurt), is a nondescript Party apparatchik whose job it is to review historical documents and insert alternative facts to suit ever-changing Party policy. He scans newspapers and books for items officially deemed 'fake news' and expunges the record. Anyone who has contradicted Party policy has their entire identification "vaporized" as if they never existed. Amidst this dystopian oppression, Winston knows that what he is doing is wrong but is powerless to act until he meets a likeminded worker called Julia (Suzanna Hamilton) with whom he can discuss his innermost thoughts. Their illegal affair is uncovered by the Thought Police and senior Party figure O'Brien (Richard Burton) tortures Winston, ultimately re-programming his brain so he can believe contradictory facts and opinions.This is a film rich in metaphor and ironic distortions. The key institutions of Oceania exist solely to manufacture 'fake news' and to psychologically manipulate the will of the people. The Ministry of Truth produces endless falsehoods and historical revisions while the Ministry of Love specialises in torture, brainwashing and executions. The Ministry of Peace ensures that war is constantly waged against vaguely defined enemies to keep the masses from complaining about the food shortages that are disguised as surpluses by the Ministry of Plenty. The Party succeeds by controlling the only accepted language called Newspeak, the sole purpose of which is to minimise vocabulary so people cannot articulate their own memories because the words no longer exist. With memories gone and facts invented, Party control is complete.In terms of contemporary cinematic standards, 1984 stands up exceptionally well for a film made 33 years ago. The principal actors are brilliant in depicting an expressionless and alienated existence. The late John Hurt had the rare ability to express his thoughts entirely through terrified eyes that stared blankly from an impassive face and he used this to full effect in some truly frightening scenes. Excellent cinematography conveys the claustrophobia of a world diminished by totalitarianism. The use of a desaturated and depressive colour palette creates vivid contrasts with scenes where Winston imagines what the real world must have looked like.Some may wonder how the depicted extreme nihilism of Orwell's 1984 can have any relevance to politics today. While the dystopian world that Orwell predicted has not materialised in a physical sense, his warnings about the manipulation of truth and political corruption are entirely prescient. The fabricated worlds of alternative facts, fake news, and policy spin are corruptions of modern political life and their threat to civilised discourse can only be contained by the power of language to speak the truth.

I always recommend that every person read 1984, it is one of the darkest and most depressing stories ever written, I was never required to read it in school, I read it on my own. I just bought it one day while I was traveling across country in a Barnes and Noble, and it certainly changed my perspective and changed my life, in a way, because it changed the way I thought. Both "1984" and "A Brave New World" are based off the novel "We", but if "A Brave New World" is through control of genetics, hedonism, and exposing them to constant stimulation, emotional and otherwise, then 1984 is the other side of the coin, a story about control through absolute coercion and lies, crushing the will. Both exist in perverted society, but they often co-mingle and exist together more than apart, most of modern media exemplifies this well, manipulation of both the truth and emotions.I think it it would be very difficult to ever truly do the book 1984 perfect justice because the vast majority of this story revolves around what we think, and in the case of Wintston, what he knows he should not think, but he cannot help thinking, and doesn't want to stop thinking. This is extremely difficult to convey without a lot more voice overs of Winston's internal monologues or more external dialogue than a film adaptation of 1984 should have, ever. It is also very hard to depict the ever shifting "histories" portrayed in the book "He who controls the past controls the present, he who controls the present controls the future." That is best shown in the movie when Winston ask if Julia believes the resistance is real, and she answers by saying "No. None of it is real." and Winston's thoughts about the truth being erased and changed to a lie and then back again. The movie does a decent job of conveying it, but it is certainly not as effective as the book. What this movie does do well is get is the bleak, dark, depressing, and oppressive tone of the book. The visual look nails exactly what the the book conveys, and Winston looks about as pathetic as he is described in the book. John Hurt does a fantastic job because humans in this world, in a way, are not humans at all, but rather shadows of themselves, and you can see the internal conflict, very slightly, on his face, even as he hides it. Winston was fascinated with the Proles, in the book, because he was fascinated with with freedoms, their seeming joy, even though they were uneducated, and unaware, he was jealous of that lack of awareness and freedom that it gave. This is not something that is conveyed extremely well in this film sadly, as it was an integral part of the book, just as much as his relationship with Julia, the Proles almost take on a mythical proportion to him in the book. Despite those caveats, I still feel this version is the best one out there. It really captures the overall feel of the book fairly well. It feels hopeless and oppressive. The difference between the book and the film is, for me, the middle section of the book, and some part early on, up until the final 1/4, there was a lot of hope in Winston's thoughts. I knew nothing about the outcome or content of the book, and this created a very unique experience, while the film did not match it the first or second time, and I felt at times, lingered away from Winston too much, with images of tanks and explosions. The final act of the film, for me, captured very well the feel of the book, and it made me just as angry watching it, as I felt reading the book, even if the ending is altered a big. I would be curious to see how people whom have never read the book would react to this, but this is one case where I would recommend reading the book first, if because the impact of the book would be reduced a little bit by knowing the majority of the events already. The idea that there is "no truth", and changing history to suit a person's or country's agenda, is extremely prevalent today, telling people they need to believe something that isn't actually true, and will hurt those who do not. The movie still conveys these things well, and I do feel it is worth watching.God Bless ~Amy