The depth of meaning beneath and between the words of dialogue, speak more than the dialogue itself. I know no other playwright or screenwriter so adept at that, nor another Mamet film that sees that quality at the same level. The undercurrents of meaning. The shifts in power. The way the phone seems to interrupt moments where peace might be found, causing the characters to lose harmony--beautifully done.

The dangers of being "politcally incorrect" and extreme feminism. Carol was right to some degree. She found it demeaning that he would simply offer her an A instead of her working for it like other (probably male) students (her feminist belief at work here). Also, she felt offended that he would ridicule a system that she felt she worked so hard to get into. She was completely wrong ethically about the sexual context but lawfully correct, which made me empathize for the teacher. It also sucks that calling a woman 'dear' or other endearing terms can be seen as sexist- otherwise she would not have had a case as far as that. For all those commenting that the dialogue is wooden-- it is supposed to be. The dialogue is wooden and uncomfortable and the story line relies on unconvering the subtext... This is a great film. I feel sorry for the dense people who see it as boring.

This film taught me something: Don't become a teacher.

My only problem in the script is how she seemed to have problems with not understanding fairly simple notions in Philosophy of Education and/or words the professor said at the beginning of their dialogues in the movie while towards the end she was suddenly mastering the English language well above a regular Bachelor student, let alone one who claims to have problems.in understanding the content of an Education or Sociology course.That was irritating..

Was given this film to watch as homework for English Literature.

The brilliance of the film is that in 1:29:33 of dialogue, they say absolutely nothing of value. nothing. the words, the tone, it's all meant to incite, to provoke, to irritate, to anger. every argument is circular.

A sub-par student uses the current infrastructure of guilt-based bias to unfairly advance herself. She represents the large crop of people who are largely intellectually impotent. They are sinking, unable to elevate themselves. They are desperate, and will grasp at ANYTHING to advance. This current crop of people have no real talents or toolsets, no real abilities. Having no real abilities or industries, they've spent their time creating a virtual industry; an industry of "hurt feelings" which pivots against "The white man's burden". They've create an environment, but not one of accountability. We left the age of accountability, and have mutated to Age of the Hurt Feelings Industry. It is a time where perception is the ONLY true reality, and where one can manipulate the system simply by pressing on the perceived guilt of those in power over them. It's truly a sad time in our (de-) evolution.

Well, deep down the heart of Carol lies only one idea: "I am THE TRUTH. I am the ONLY ONE WHO IS CORRECT." And against whatever counterarguments or external threats she may face, she just depends herself with the simple-but-unbreakable armor of words: "Hey, no one's thoughts can dominate another." This is what I see. At the climax part where she comes again to John's office and talk about the report that was sent to the committee, you can see that she just "declares" everything. And eventually she declares that John tried to rape her. Of course she can think that way, she may have felt that way. But just because she thought or felt that way, that does not mean it becomes the absolute truth. It only becomes one of the possibility until it's objectively proven. Sure, every person does the same, thinking what they say is the only truth, in some degree, and you can obviously see John is also doing the same from the entire movie. I think this is why people are talking about "two individuals that cannot communicate the very soul of each other". BUT I see difference in Carol's thought process and John's, and therefore I think it should be something other than "the two souls thing". John did NOT clearly state that what he's saying is the truth and NOT explicitly force Carol to accept it, while Carol did it to John. And I think that is because John was aware of the possibility that he might not be the bearer of the truth, either consciously or unconsciously.

Brilliantly acted!

It's my favorite movie. I love this movie. Macy was already a great actor and today with the series "Shameless" he continues to confirm it.

She really shouldn't have said that. I mean his life was pretty much ruined and she felt the need to say "Don't call your wife baby." Just unnecessary. I can't feel bad for her at the end. She kinda had that coming.

The play is much better than the movie...see it on stage!!

Great film, be careful what you say and who you say it to.

I heard that this was a really good play with complex characters but it seems that Carol is just crazy and looking for something to complain about for her group's agenda.

This is a great film... but before you watch TURN OFF THE ANNOTATIONS. Right near the end of the film, AN ANNOYING-AS-FUCK annotation pops up making fun of the film, ruining the emotional momentum. To the person who wrote the annotation: PLEASE REMOVE IT. And also- some of the other commenters seem really dumb. Carol isn't wrong- John's behavior is deplorable and disrespectful- the tragedy is that he just didn't know any better, and he loses everything because of it.

This video worked for me regarding my A-Levels, maybe it will work for you.

So far the teacher speaks about the purpose of education and educating for educating self. I agree with the meaningless of education imparting approach.

cool, good to know seeing as i need to write about this in an exam in 12 hours time.

She fancies the teacher so much, she destroys him.

People are too foolish to understand this movie and why she is right on some level. Yes, she's wrong on the most obvious, surface level, but she's also right in some depeer sense (as proven by the end of the movie).

I thought it was good. Better than I had expected. Some commentators criticize the dialogue but I wonder how long they continued to watch while being annoyed.... at first I didn't think I would watch more than 2 minutes and by the end I thought it'd ended too quickly! The dialectic between student and instructor slowly turned the proud and cocky professor into a sad and sorry fool whose burgeoning incoherence forces him to rely upon violence to soothe his anger. Bravo Mamet!

The background of the name "oleanna" is written in neon all over the play. This movie is really quite a good version, even though a few things differ. Both actors played their parts quite well. Four out of four stars!

She destroyed his life, just to suit the agenda of her "group". We have but one question -- Why did he stop beating her?

why is carol wearing that ridiculous suit

wow, that is scary! frightening! when human meets system! there are really people like that little school girl... i have met them...

Alguém consegue versão dublada ou legendada???

"Mamet Speak" at its finest! Or worst, whatever you prefer.

Prophetic!

I think Carol has some kind of crush on this dude. And because she's so repressed in her own sexuality and pretty much her life, she doesn't know how to express it. She keeps coming back for more, even in the end when most people would flee for the hills! The "group" tries to get her to frame this guy. They twist her thinking. I really truly wish we knew what makes her "bad!" If I ever see Mamet on the street I'm going to ask him this. But yes, Eisenstadt the actress is very annoying. Her grandpa invented Sweet 'n Low so I am sure she's sitting on a sweet pile of money - maybe bought her way into this production? Her performance is so wooden you have to wonder.

anyone know whether this is the exact text?

I really, really hope that the intended irony of this was that you were indefinite as to which kind you were referring.

Oh christ how to turn brilliant actors into speak your weight machines. Mamet was great a few years back but now his dialogue,or more to the point, the way he directs and imposes HIS exact way of speech on the actors kills it stone dead.

The cadence of the dialogue is nauseating. I feel her timing in delivery is off just enough to lack credulity. To me, her character is one of the most annoying ever created. However, there is something so compelling about this that is hard to stop watching. William Macy is one of the great talents of our time. As is evidenced by her career, she is not much of an actor and has instead done most of her work behind the camera as director, etc

humans are so funny!

I have to admit, in the first act, I was really irritated at the dialogue--it felt forced and wooden. But as the film went on, I found myself "getting it"--the professor had been constantly twisting words to assert his power and the girl sounded "wooden" because she was timidly choosing her words carefully...TOO carefully, but it spoke to her nervousness and vulnerability. I personally wish Mamet has made the dialogue in the first act "flow" a bit better--but with that hindsight, I understand his decisions, there.

Ahhh...the futility....

She is like a robot.

I wish Mamet had focused more on the classism and the tendency of economic unfairness in higher education in Oleanna, rather than just using feminism as a scapegoat.

and.... no one wins. What was up with that ending with the school lawn?

It's a Mamet play. Everybody's like a robot.

The dialogue is stilted and parodic. This is not Mamet's best work although it has some interesting elements.

This women is a compete lunatic!

Despite what happened I feel sorry for the teacher the most

There are some differences but mainly it's exactly the same.

Its worst for me because so contrived and handedly-handedly trying to obtrude points on the audience that it rings false...and I am a huge fan of Mamet's finest plays.

don’t call her baby.

this is directed by David Mamet himself?

All in all, neither character came out looking very good at all. They were both "bad". There were a lot of digs about the pedantic college instructor who wanted to be a bad boy, while attaining the comfortable privileged life of a tenured professor. The confused Carol obviously got involved with an extreme feminist "group" on campus which gave voice to her frustration. That's a no-brainer. 20 year old college students are easy prey to extreme political movements (I was once).

Don't call your wife baby.

The debate between feminists & MRAs is pointless mostly because of the rigid attitudes on both sides where any objective moderate approach is ignored. Oleana was obviously an overly dramatized caricature of extreme feminism on campus, but there really are people like her. It's pretty common for movie characters to be overstated. Anyway, I could tell right off, that this was a movie adaptation of a play with all the stilted dialogue.

My lit professor wants to put this play on so badly...with me as John!

Skip it. Mamet meets Pinter meets still another one-acter for method students to practice their technique. The set-up gives everything away, and we really don't need the denouement.

i love this movie. Obviously he hit his breaking point, and Carroll got what she deserved.

Twenty years old and it perfectly encapsulates the pointless debate between feminism and the mens' rights movement that's going on right now.

I think that's on purpose. She's supposed to represent a certain ideology and rhetoric, not be a full-fledged person. The actress isn't all that great but it's a bitch of a role to try and inject any humanity into.

I don't think it took much balls to write this, I mean I enjoyed it but it tells everybody what they want to hear - ie, that academic feminism is absurd and out of control. That's not exactly an unpopular sentiment and Mamet knew that full well going into this.

Mamet's ridiculously mannered dialogue is often intolerable.

Carol needs a psychiatrist.

This student does not seem very smart... And she seems to have serious mental issues.

This is good but Fargo is waaaaayy better. Ey?

The actor that plays John is pretty good! Carol on the other hand, not so.

But I thought Mamet said all teachers are rapists so... I don't get why that didn't happen in this? I mean, it's what he believes, isn't it??

The dialogue was irritating & Carol pissed me off! Great job Manet!

The patient zero of snowflakes.

depressing...not gonna watch it

boring,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

*mamet

For me that was a key experience. A young woman wants to learn math and doesn't understand it. She asks her teacher for tutoring. He would be willing, but wants something in return. Because she has no money he asks for sex. But he shouldn't have done that! In the end nobody has anything. He's losing his job and she still hasn't figured out math. That's how feminism works.

All I'm gonna say is, at 1:23:00 she had her chance to leave...

The great Mamet dialogues are brilliant; House of Games, Glenn Gary Glenn Ross etc...but his one is pathetically bad and thus the acting is impossible...here he is trying to be clever and miserably failing....the whole dialogue and underlying premisses are manipulative and specious....it haven't seen a good Mamet dialogue the check the two I mentioned and/ or The Edge...all of which are brilliant.

Overall, a really lame movie.

And there it is. I just lost one and a half hour of my life that i will never get back. This is one of the worst films i have ever seen.