Hailed as a masterpiece by some, and a near one by others, I liked it quite a bit, and never felt bored in spite of it's nearly 4 hour running time. I was quite moved – to the point of tears - by the end. It looks and feels like no other movie I've seen, shot in a shifting sepia tone, with very little dialogue, and long silent takes. It's an intimate epic. Sort of a Japanese version of a Terrence Malick film. A young brother and sister, and a bus driver are the only survivors of a random bus-jacking by a madman. The three retreat from the world. But two years later the bus driver seeks out the brother and sister – living alone and mute despite their youth – and the long, slow process of healing begins. As much as I liked a lot of it, certain plot twists felt clunky or heavy handed, as did some of the dialogue. A movie so based in unspoken emotion loses something when the themes suddenly become too literal, in word or action. But, those are things that might bother me less on a second viewing, when I was more prepared for this unique, odd, challenging film.

It has been almost 6 years since I saw this film, yet this film can stick with me and still offer me things.After a tragic incident of violence, a bus driver tries to find two other teen-aged survivors, a brother and sister. The sparse black and white camera work provide an insight into the bleak emotional landscape as they just stumble through as "walking dead". Having lost a father, I can identify with the characters. What is touching is the lack of communication and dialogue between the actors (whic includes the lead of the Japanese "Shall We Dance" ). Yet there is love and communication made even by just the thumping on bus walls. Words fail them.The camera work is bleak yet stunning in composition and texture. Minimal yet just enough to feel the principals trying to find meaning in life. One can also speak of the Japanese economic downturn and the resulting introspective dramatic films such as Hirokazu's "After Life". If have experienced grief or if you'd like to find some insight into it, this may be a film. It seemed shorter than the four hours, but you are forewarned.

I bought a cheap copy of Eureka from ebay (I couldn't get the nice UK version because I don't have a region-free DVD player), and was utterly transfixed by it--what a terrific film! However, through some awful twist of fate, the disc is flawed and I missed the ending of the movie. I'm hoping that I only missed the last few minutes, but I'm really p*ssed off nonetheless. I know I was near the end of the film from the chapter menu. Here's the last thing I saw: (SPOILER AHEAD) Makoto and Kazue stop at what seems to be some sort of ceremonial garden. The two previous scenes saw Makoto calling his ex-wife's beauty parlor and then hanging up, and then Kazue forming words with seashells on the bus. It looks like Makoto, having another coughing fit, collapses. thats the last thing i can see before the DVD skips back to the menu screen. If you're seen the movie, please help! thanks!

I have this movie on dvd and I can now say that the more I watch itthe more I like it. This is top cinema. The scene when the mother of the kids wave tothem or the one when the mother leaves the house to never comeback and we see like a tube with a liquid inside which swingsback and forward are just great. The performing actors and thecinematography is excellent. Very beautiful indeed. Yes, perhaps a bit long but it's justified. This is a good example ofa movie which has a low pace but which is right, precise, goodand relevant to the subject and not, for instance, like the movies ofTheo Angelopoulus which are simply unbearable and extremelypretentious. In cannes 2000 Eureka won the fipresci award. It is true that theyear 2000 was a tough one to win because of the high level of theproductions on competition but I have some doubts why "dancer inthe dark" won to movies like this one or "in the mood for love", themasterpiece of Wong Kar Wei Japanese cinema is producing great movies. This is anotherexample of it.