MartinHafer "Septembers of Shiraz" is a well made and very well acted film...but I cannot see many people wanting to see it for several obvious reasons. First, it's about the Iranian Revolution of 1979 and a lot of people just don't find this a 'sexy' subject for films. Second, no matter how how do such a film, people will find fault in how the Revolution is handled. Third, and most importantly, the film is incredibly unpleasant with scenes of torture...and a lot of folks don't want to watch someone being tortured. All these conspire to make this a difficult film to say the least.The film begins as the Revolution is beginning. No context whatsoever is given to the viewer--nothing about the previous brutal regime of the Shah nor about the ideology of the Ayatollah and his followers. All you really learn is that the Shah was awful and the people who followed were awful. I know more about it because I am a retired history teacher...but the average viewer, particularly younger ones, will feel a bit confused. I think the reason they did this related to the second problem above...and so they apparently tried to make the film as apolitical and a personal film as they could instead. The story is about a Jewish family and their particular experiences during this time. The husband, Isaac (Adrien Brody), is arrested...though you never learn exactly why. It seems as if he was arrested simply because he was rich and he undergoes both mental and physical torture from the new Republican Guard. During this time, his wife (Salma Hayek) waits and waits and watches everything they owned get stolen from thieves...all in the name of the Revolution. Will the husband be released and what of the family?I noticed some folks complained about this film because the look wasn't just right--such as the wrong sorts of cars being shown in Iranian roads. Well...considering it was NOT filmed in Iran, and I STRONGLY DOUBT the government would have allowed this, this sort of complaint seems bizarre at best. The film was made in Bulgaria...and I guess they tried their best. I'll say no more about this.Overall, the film is very well made and compelling...and unpleasant. Because it is a story about a real family, however, I cannot just dismiss it. It's worth seeing IF you are up to the task.

lavatch In Iran, the city of Shiraz has traditionally been associated with great cultural achievements in poetry, literature, and magnificent gardens. Set at the inception of the Iranian revolution of 1979, "Septembers of Shiraz" focuses on the tyranny of the oppressive rule of the Ayatollah Khomeini, as directed against a businessman.The focal point of the film is a Jewish merchant of precious stones and jewelry, who is summarily arrested, tortured, and extorted of his fortune in order to survive. Adrien Brody delivers another complex and moving performance as the jeweler named Isaac. Salma Hayak-Pinault is outstanding as Isaac's wife, Farnaz. The action is taut and the pacing is deliberate, as Isaac's long period in captivity and his ordeal of torture are chronicled in lurid detail.One of the best scenes in the film is the moment where Isaac's captor named Mohsen, as played by Alon Aboutboul, engages Isaac in an extended conversation. The climax of the scene is when Isaac persuasively points to the circularity of their relationship and how Mohsen's extremism has made him captive to his obsession for revenge. Mohsen is no less a prisoner than Isaac. In this area, the film could have developed more completely the background on the repressive regime of the Shah of Iran and the barbarity of the methods used by his secret police, the dreaded SAVAK.Another key relationship in the film was that of Farnaz and the household maid Habibeh, given a remarkable screen interpretation by the husky-voiced Iranian actress Shohreh Aghdashloo. In the ebb and flow of this relationship, Habibeh begins to side with the revolutionaries, yet is deeply conflicted due to the kindness shown to her by Farnaz and Isaac. In a moving scene near the end of the film, Habibeh comes around to support Issac and Farnaz, rejecting her son, who has turned informant on the family. In an ironic twist, however, the last we hear of the son is that he has been arrested by the new theocratic regime for his personal greed in looting precious stones from Isaac's business.In the DVD "Behind the Scenes" segment, it is clear that the film artists approached this film with great intelligence, including the screenwriter, director, and design team, who were all passionate about making a film that depicts not only a repressive regime at one moment in time in 1979, but for all forms of tyranny that refuse to honor reverence for life. Tragically, this story is all too familiar well into the twenty-first century.

Chris Engelbrecht Didn't think too much of it at first. But then I read some of the few reviews in here and elsewhere, and everything started to sound fishy. It ain't _that_ bad. Sure you can tell stories about the impact of religious mass hysterical envy on an entire country, suffered by decent people just because they dare to have made a bit of money under the old regime. So the Shah wasn't a bloody angel either, but you don't fight fire by pissing gasoline on the fire. In fact you should tell such stories, as this flick clearly shows. Not that I didn't already know that Ayatollah Iran is no different in hysteria from a communist regime, but this one confirms it again.This flick suddenly became important tell just on that alone. Somebody here isn't from Estonia. Or from Bulgaria. I guess some people just aren't accustomed to their selfish oppression of decent folk having a better life than themselves being called out in international movies. It's a bitch being on the wrong side of history too, innit, fana? (Lot of that going 'round in the world these days.)

perfecthuman A script full of tension, acting full of emotions, an environment almost natural, a political satire without being getting personal, this film has all the elements to prove it a great film and a certain winner at Oscars for Best acting Male, Best acting Female and Best original script.The era depicted is the most historical turning point of Iran but no good or bad words or opinions are passed for the supreme leader which is a good thing as it becomes very difficult or nearly impossible to remain neutral and present the whole theme objectively. Rather the mass subjects were used to advance the approach and theme of the revolution which may or may not be right, and hence the actual reason behind the whole revolution is perceived subjectively, may be right, may be wrong, but never judgmental. Adrien Broody is high on emotions and it is hard to believe that he isn't in actual what he is portraying right now. The only shortfall comes in his accent where he switches to American English in many scenes, and not able to pronounce the name of his son, Parvez, with perfection even once. On the other hand, Salma Hayek as Fernaz or Jewish Iranian is totally believable and absorbing. Her body language, her expressions, her accent makes the character tailor- made for her. Her half-American half-Iranian accent is perfectly rendered and she even pronounces the name of her son, Parvez, in a perfect way. This is undoubtedly her most challenging and best work so far.***SPOILERS ALERT***Although the ending is not up to the mark as compare to the rest of the events in the film, as more tension could have been added towards climax, but then we have to keep in mind that the film is based on some true events. Some details or aftermath of some events were left unexplained, but those are passable. Overall it's a strong film but unfortunately an underrated one. Watch it with an open mind, and for some good piece of acting with a tensed script. It's worth a watch, for serious movie-goers. Maybe an Oscar winner of 2016, who knows!!!