ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Paynbob It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

lor_ I've been following Fred Wiseman's career since 1966, when I was in college at MIT, where he previewed his yet to be released debut movie "Titicut Follies". I've watched many of his subsequent works, including the hard to sit through (in an uncomfortable Alice Tully Hall screening) 5-hour "Hospital", and on the occasion of his look at NY's venerable library system I have some structural matters to discuss.Wiseman differs from most documentary directors in refusing to use voice-over narration, or on-screen commentary, or even any superimposed identifiers to show the identity of players on screen. This is a defect of "Ex Libris", though he gets all the brownie points imaginable for purity of his approach. Clarity, however, is sacrificed.Instead, it is both editing and the selection of which material (I'm sure he accumulated many hours of suitable footage to sift through here) to use that gives Wiseman his style. The tedium is usually worth the wait in terms of learning something.This reminds me of Cinema's worst self-imposed limitation movement of all time, the stupid (and hopefully dead as a door nail) Dogme manifesto of a couple of decades back. In the same search for some phony notion of purity, Lars von Trier and other misguided advocates eschewed all sorts of things like artificial light, special effects and many camera techniques - a horrible experiment. Cinema should be about using and discovering whatever will enhance the finished film, not tying one up in knots to adhere to some regimented akin to Puritanical belief.Simlarly, the Nouvelle Vague directors in France at the end of the 1950s created a still influential revolution cinema, but also through out plenty of "babies with the bath water" in the process. Besides disparaging the classic work of the '30s and '40s romantic greats like Autant-Lara, Carne, Delannoy and Prevert, led by Godard they abandoned many a basic element like reverse-shot set-ups and cutting that are fundamental to quality cinema. Watching the swish-pans from face to face that Godard & his followers would use instead of tried-and-true reverse shots was a painful experience for me (akin to sarcastic extreme camera moves in close-up coverage of a ping pong or tennis match) to endure. Net result is many a brilliant French movie made during the '40s left unknown to a couple of generations of film buffs thanks to the New Wave emphasis (especially in film schools), and so many current hacks, even lauded ones, unaware how to edit properly - e.g., the frequent and jarring cutting across the center line that folks untrained in proper reverse shot procedure commit regularly. (Hint: watch the heads jumping back and forth on screen during a simple conversation in many a bad TV show or indie feature.)

felice-witch-1 This documentary is extraordinary! Inspiring! Educational in a profound way. Not just about culture and history, but about humanity and our contemporary world with its complexe histories and fast coming future. Somehow, it achieves what I think the New York Public Library sets out to do for all its patrons: Open our minds, our hearts, give us hope and enthusiasm and bring us closer as a human community. I live in Edinburgh but felt so connected to everyone in this film. And without the use of a single interview! I love New York and now I realise that part of the soul of the city lies in this incredible institution. Man it is good to see powerful people who care! And people from all walks of life who care! I commend the filmmaker and the New York Public library for their incredible work. I would work for either in a heartbeat! Thank you thank you thank you for this beautiful documentary.

anagram14 OK, I'm biased. I love libraries. If you don't, let it be. If you do, prepare for bliss. The movie wanders from one branch of the NYPL to the other in a way that seems aimless at first, but builds a rhythm that becomes almost musical while remaining completely natural. The glimpses we get of what's happening at every branch tell an uplifting story. A library is no longer just a place to store books. It serves its patrons in surprising ways: providing Internet access and teaching computer skills; hosting groups of young parents with toddlers chanting nursery rhymes together; not evicting the odd homeless person who dozes off there in winter; finding private funding for what the unreliable distributors of public spending won't cover this year. Where this venerable institution really comes into its own, though, is in providing a platform for all the incredibly articulate and inspiring people who keep popping up throughout the movie. What a joy to watch. Discussions, lectures, interviews, concerts, poetry, passionate arguments, everything nerds thrive on. And not just nerds. Elvis Costello and Patti Smith are among the guests. Keith Richards is on record as saying that the library was the only place where he willingly obeyed the rules. Toni Morrison called libraries pillars of democracy. I was a believer before seeing this. Now I know why. If you are too, this is a must.

maurice yacowar At over three hours, this is an epic film. It has to be because it's about an epic institution: the New York Public Library, its history, its management, its multiple branches, its global city mission, its changing nature. As usual, director Frederick Wiseman moves silently, invisibly, unobtrusively, through his subject institution. He doesn't intrude, but lets what he finds in sound and image reveal his message. Of course, a documentary is as calculated an arrangement of materials designed to make the director's point as any fiction is. But Wiseman doesn't interfere. He doesn't even make cuts within a scene or a speech. He lets the material reveal itself — though he has chosen what material to show, what message will be revealed.The frequent committee meetings make this film equally about the richness of the Library's offerings and the challenges of its governance. The Board has to work for the public's support, convince both its public and private funders to meet its needs, and balance the demands of the traditional needs with the new. Indeed, in this Library, a massive institute with responsibility for a dramatically diverse community, Wiseman finds a microcosm of America itself. Hardly any of the speakers are identified because the film is not really about them but about the institution they serve — and the national culture it represents. For the federal government has the same responsibilities of meeting the citizens' needs and generating the income to do so. But where Trump "loves the poorly educated" — to the point of trying to convert all Americans to that — the Library loves all its citizens — to the point of wanting to improve all their lives. As the studies of the users' faces reveals, the Library serves America's diversity in culture, economic class, education level, and needs. The Chinatown branch provides materials in Chinese to serve that culture and English materials to ease their assimilation. The Braille branch tapes books and teaches the blind to read. In all the branches the Library works to bring the citizens into the computer age. The Westchester branch teach kids robotics. The Bronx audience at a modern wind quartet is largely working class or unemployed, street people. The programming is not what we'd expect. Some sleep, some are simply staying warm, one woman mimes a singalong, but for each person there the music is doing some service. In the Harlem branch an impassioned poet's recital is punctuated by a baby's cries in the audience. That's life, which the artist must accommodate. So does the Library; so should the government.Bu the Republican government isn't. Time and again the speakers express a tacit resistance to the Trump administration. At a job fair, a border guard reads a statement about his job and its importance. He lacks the sincerity and warmth of the others who speak from their heart. As one speaker asserts, the library is no longer about books; it's about people. That's what the government has forgotten: it thinks it's about things, about securing personal profits, not about the citizens it is supposed to be serving. In a forceful correction to Trump, the Muslim director of the Schoenberg Institute cites the line, "The library is the pillar of democracy." In fact Muslims appear throughout the film as helpful Library stuff or citizens with the same earnest needs and care as their paler citizens. A Jewish author celebrates the Jewish immigrants and their deli tradition. This is melting pot America not our current racist paranoia.Wiseman's Library reminds us where America's greatness lies — in welcoming citizens from around the world and enabling them to make the best lives for themselves that they can. Among the most powerful correctives to current America are the speeches about the African American experience, the revival of racism, and the failure of modern capitalism to provide a fair and equal distribution of wealth. There's a lot of talk here, but it's important talk, the kind of thoughtful, articulate and constructive debate that's beyond the skill and ethics of current politics. That the Library provides the arena and the thinkers and the audience for such discussion makes it of epic importance to our future. If this New York can't save America what will?