NekoHomey Purely Joyful Movie!

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

shandee_salinas So I think this movie was bad because of the way Walter,Beneatha, and George Murchison acted.When George and Beneatha were at the club dancing,George made it look like he wasn't trying.Walter really didn't show the way he acted like in the book.Beneatha didn't act so strong as a woman, she acted like a normal person in the real life,it's not like the book.The book made it more explosive and very interesting.

Scott Amundsen I am not a huge fan of remakes, particularly when the original is as iconic as the 1961 A RAISIN IN THE SUN. But this is a worthy effort, particularly considering it was made for television.I think casting Sean Combs as Walter Lee was a mistake; he lacks the intensity that Sidney Poitier exhibited in the original, and in fact at times seems uncertain as to how to play the role. But the producers have buttressed his performance with some heavy duty talent: Phylicia Rashad as Lena, Audra McDonald as Ruth, and Sanaa Lathan as Beneatha.Yet despite all this there is a curious lack of energy to this production. Rashad tries hard, but she does not have the gravitas that Claudia McNeil brought to the role. McDonald tries even harder, but all I can say is she's no Ruby Dee and perhaps the comparison is even a tad bit unfair. As for Lathan, she's the only one with a certain amount of energy, but I found her deliberate imitation of Diana Sands, right down to the way she read some of her lines, irritating and unworthy of an actress whom I suspect is more talented than that and simply chose to cut corners.The sole improvement on the 1961 film is the role of Asagai. Not so much David Oyelowo's performance, though he's fine here, but in the original film the role was severely cut down from the stage version and this production replaces an important speech delivered by the character to Beneatha after the money has been lost. Pity that Ivan Dixon did not get the chance to deliver this speech in the 1961 film.The five stars are mostly for the smooth camera work and a fair effort on the part of the actresses. As remakes go it isn't bad, but when it was over I still was left with the feeling "Why did they bother?"

BlackRoseShelli After watching the original, I had to watch the 2008 remake with Sean Combs and Phylicia Rashad. There were additional scenes that weren't in the original, but for the most part it was nearly word for word, which was surprising for a remake. I also thought some of it was better than the original, but a few scenes weren't as good, either. I thought Phylicia Rashad did a better job at Lena than Claudia McNeil did. And Ruby Dee in the original did a better job at Ruth than Audra McDonald did. The part of Beneatha was well played by both actresses.Overall, if this were the only version I'd ever seen, I'd say they did a fantastic job!

aharmas Without going into any specifics by any particular member of the cast, it should be established that all pieces in this adaptation work very well together. This includes every minute detail in the production which recreates the period flawlessly to the richness of the performances by all the female actresses who edge their male counterparts in quite remarkable ways. The difference between the genres is how naked their emotions are, and how amazing their range is. In the end, it is not that Diddy didn't quite meet the expectations but that he hasn't quite gotten to their level yet. If he added a bit more vulnerability to his character or expanded the range, it would have soared. As it is, it pretty competent, and it doesn't lessen from the overall impact of the piece because once you take everything and everybody else in consideration, this is a very good film.Race was still a pretty touchy subject back in the 50's and 60's and a lot of what we take for granted was still not quite within the grasp of many African Americans. There were soul that managed to shelter themselves from the horrible prejudice that shattered many a spirit, and there were many who still saw the abyss as unconquerable. Dreams were shattered and buried, and most of the time, bitterness was the end result.A family of African Americans has their dreams within reach, and what should be seen as a godsend, becomes a divider, as everyone in this family places his or her own dream ahead of everyone else's, and in the middle of this chaotic situation, we have a steady force that might not be able to solve this problem. As the story develops, she manages to find a solution, but this is promptly derailed by one of the family members who can't see straight.In the meantime, the family slowly finds their way to seeing one of their dreams come true, only to see it endangered by the insecurities of their contemporaries. It is both the best and worst of times for people as change is in the horizon, but it is still quite hard to achieve. Amazingly, the wisest words come from some who come places where the opportunity to dream is for most just a dream, but it is this perspective that makes someone realize that all change must come from within and not hang on the luck of others. It is time to take responsibility for their own changes and decisions.It is a lovely film, strong,insightful, powerful, and as thought provoking them as it was when it was first released as a play. It is a film to watch, study, and treasure.