Love & Friendship

[Fantod]

Posted: 5/20/16 at 11:32pm

Anybody else see this? Whit Stillman has always kind of been making Jane Austen movies in the first place, so this is a match made in heaven. Kate Beckinsale is fantastic and the movie is a really fun time at the movies, though I would recommend that you immediately turn your brain on as there is quite a bit of information given to you very quickly. I was not fully prepared and it left one of the storylines rather vague to me until the end, 

It is a far more minor work from Austen originally, so there's no real dramatic heft. Just wit and wordplay, which is always a good time.

Updated On: 5/20/16 at 11:32 PM

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 5/20/16 at 11:57pm

Well... not ALWAYS a good time as far as I was concerned. I was far more entertained by the secondary characters than by Kate Beckinsale's-- I just found her so utterly one-note and like a 21st century actress play-acting at living in the 19th, something the rest of the cast was better able to pull off than she.

I couldn't believe that virtually the ENTIRE movie took place in one drawing room after another. Where was the farcical staging that would build and build to a crazy climax, to a comeuppance, to some sort of dramatic turnabout for one of the characters? No duels, no carriage chases, not even a table setting upended. Everything was so flattened emotionally, that when the final pairings of couples were revealed, I just felt so ho-hum about the whole affair. 

Yes, there was much sparkling dialogue, but the basic architecture for a great time was sadly missing for me. 

Oh, and the costumes were an anachronistic threadbare disaster-- I chalked it up to severe budget restraints, but who knows?

 

Updated On: 5/20/16 at 11:57 PM

[Fantod]

Posted: 5/21/16 at 12:37am

^ I did notice the costumes were pretty tacky

Structural issues with comedies don't usually bother me if I'm laughing the whole time, which I mostly was here. I also felt that the ho-hum quality was one of intentional emotional detachment rather than failing to engage the audience.

You are in the minority here (not that your opinion is invalid at all) given that it has a 100% on RottenTomatoes.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 5/21/16 at 6:40am

Count me in the minority too.  (Not so unusual in this season of Shuffle, Along and The Crucible.)  What a snooze.  Plot usually weds Austen to the movies as tastily as sprinkled cinnamon to buttered toast.  This one is a rancorous bore.  I'd love for someone to explain to me why anyone cares about this woman, would find her irresistibly flirtatious, or has any patience for her tiresome plight.

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 5/21/16 at 12:10pm

"You are in the minority here (not that your opinion is invalid at all) given that it has a 100% on RottenTomatoes."

Yeah, that 100% rating was exactly why we rushed to see it.

And by the way, Fantod, what a perfect gentleman you've become. It's a pleasure having discussions with you.

[fflagg]

Posted: 5/21/16 at 4:11pm

I thought it was flat with no real wit or laughs. It was trying to be a comedic version of "Dangerous Liaisons". Kate has American perfect teeth (think Jodie Foster in "Nell" and Chloe does not photograph well on film (just like Shirley Jones). She looks like her face is dipped in olive oil. 

There's an inside joke re her character being from CT as Chloe is also from CT. 

It was nice to see Vanessa Redgrave's niece in the film. 

[hork]

Posted: 5/22/16 at 11:52pm

It's funny, I found it really boring, too. Are we the only people who didn't like this movie? Other than the one critic who didn't like it?