to not ignore. to not forget. to confess. to see the traces. to say the truth. to be part of the past. the film of Aram Egoyan could be strange. because it seems be the return to a source of pain who has too deep roots. because it seems be an Armenian tragedy. or one of basic motifs for the relation not real comfortable with Turkey. but, "Aram" is a necessary film. for the viewer from East is obvious why. because the past has the force to define the present. because the memories are the tool for define the future. because the Armenocid is not a closed file. sure, to explore the contemporary significance in the life of people far by Caucasus is a risky project. but not eccentric. because the result is not exactly a story but a large fresco. because the impact of the events from 1915 is not a page of history. but the seed who has as fruit the contemporary every day existence. a film about memory.

In spite of a lukewarm critical response, the fact that Ararat won Best Motion Picture at the Genie Awards and that it would be a definite personal film to Atom Egoyan sounds promising. He viewed his better films The Sweet Hereafter (1997) and Remember (2015) as having allusions to the Armenian Genocide, which impacted his family; Ararat is meant to deal with the often neglected subject head-on, or so you'd think. Rather, it deals with a crew in Toronto that makes a film about the genocide. Seeing snippets of their work, I wish Egoyan had made some version of that instead.I rarely use this criticism of film, but Ararat is excessively preachy, much of it coming from David Alpay and Bruce Greenwood, who spout out facts at length, often without a lot of emotion, and often to people who wouldn't be much interested. A lot of this is entirely irrelevant a customs official like Plummer's character, no matter how the film attempts to spin this. When Alpay's character quotes Hitler about no one remembering the Armenians, Elias Koteas' character, who'd earlier questioned if the account went exactly as it is said to, and who notes this matter is behind him and his colleagues born in Canada, echoes the Nazi dictator's sentiment in a deeply sinister voice. He has gone from mild skepticism to all-out Hitler, in Egoyan's shameless breach of Godwin's law.Much of this smacks as false. When Greenwood's character, an actor, is advised to read a book that inspired the film, the character replies he has read the book, along with every single thing ever written about the artist it's about, the Armenian Genocide, and the Armenian people in general, and the character isn't even said to be Armenian. Is this the kind of in-depth expertise Egoyan finds in his actors on a regular basis? Do actors who've read every book ever written about the broadest of subjects frequently line up at his auditions, and he gets his pick? I'm sure every other director envies him.Films about films are too common. Occasionally, you get a really great one that makes it okay, such as Sunset Blvd. Most of the time, it's just narcissistic, and in this case, it definitely gets in the way of the awareness Egoyan was hoping to create.

This movie is quite informative... I'd say too informative, and the reason is that the writer/director lagged on endlessly on making the characters explain way too much instead of allowing the medium of film and image explain it. That's something I've always been against, the excessive ultra intellectual dialogue which makes the plot come across as unreal. Yes, there are people all over who know topics and issues, but when you bring that to a screen it becomes another version of The Da Vinci Code, before or after the latter's production. The acting isn't good, not even Christopher Plummer's or Elias Koeats'... but that can be attributed to the writing and direction. The acting was stilted and preachy on most sides. The information provided was great and the scenes from the Armenian Genocide are shocking. No complains there. Directors and writers MUST understand that jam-packing dialogue into a 120 minute piece only makes a movie unwatchable, unless you're interested in the topic, of course. Cramming lines doesn't work in a visual medium. 12 Years a Slave is a perfect example of how to rely not on dialogue but on the subtlety of camera movements and the talent of a well chosen cast. Anyways, that's my take on Ararat to which I'm still awarding 7/10 although it should be a 6.5/10

As the president of Turkey announced to the world 1 year ago, Turkish government is opened all of the Ottoman's archive they have which is millions of documents for all history researches about world war 1 and sending all Armenian to the place that they can live peacefully. But neither the Armenian government is seem to use this opportunity nor they didn't even consider it as an option.Moreover they are still not opening their archives they are just blaming with not giving reason Because they know that its not a genocide its just what they use to get elected in their country and targeting a big enemy so that they can be united.Turkey doesn't have millions of dollars to spend on this issue there are no movies about so this called genocide that made in Turkey. What we do make special effects and editing in those armenian genocide and Ararat movies because in Armenia they don't have that technology we help them to express theirselves. Because we are indulgent to every opinion and we respect them but we cant except thing that didn't happened.