During the DVD commentary, which is good, it was noted that Roger Ebert didn't like the film, but Carl Reiner thought it remarkable. [His phone message is found at the end of the commentary track ... down to the phone number he left!] The (Jewish) director noted that he'll take that any day. A search for a review brought up another one, which admired how the film looked ("poetry") but not how it told the story as a whole. I find the review too negative, but there is some bite to this:
Though the scenes are ordered logically, they’re handled in a way that’s so choppy, they feel more like unrelated episodes than chapters of the same story; gaps in the plot end up getting filled in with archival footage and onscreen text.I had the feeling while watching this authorized film version of an autobiographical work (the author -- now a journalist -- shows up in the DVD extras and praised the result) that a three hour story was told in half that time. The result involved some scenes of great power, the various actors very good, but I repeatedly felt we were merely getting incomplete snapshots of events. If we accept this limitation, Carl Reiner was correct -- it was a remarkable film, particularly given how much material is found therein. Great locations as well. And, as the director noted, it is important to note that this is not supposed to be the whole story. It is tells the stories of some people, mainly through one point of view because that is what the film is about. If it cannot fully tell even that in under two hours, expecting even more is unfounded.
The movie starts with the start of a school for Palestinian orphans, survivors of a massacre arising from the creation of modern Israel, a school where Miral eventually winds up. First, we see a bit (over a span of twenty years) of the story of the school's originator and then of Miral's mother, both who could have been subjects of their own film. The brief two scenes with Willem Dafoe's character underlines how we are left wanting to learn more about these characters and events. Then, we skip to the main character's sixteenth year as the first Intifada goes on. Various moments -- a possible first love with a member of the Intifada, an interrogation scene, a solider questions her on a bus, a possible friendship with a Jewish girlfriend of a family member etc. are excellent.
I never really got a full feel for Miral as a whole, again the need to compress so much into around an hour of screen time limiting. The director suggested there was a two and a half hour director cut out there, but that he had to make choices to put together a film for general audiences. He feels the result was successful and it was in various ways. I say this more so after watching it again via the commentary track. I still see the reviewer's point and can see how some will be unsatisfied. But, even they, if truly fair, should recognize that even if the sum of the parts aren't as good as individual scenes, the parts still are worthwhile viewing.
I tried to read the book, but could not get into it. Just one of those times when it didn't "start" well enough for me to latch on. The Internet probably worsens the situation, since I read so much more on here now, but this seems to be happening more often these days. The book logically would provide more space to tell the stories here, though it wasn't that long, so might have limitations too. The film ends with Miral about to go to school in Italy and hope that a political settlement was reached. The early 1990s.