Why I don't like this movie.
Unnecessary prologue, which can not read. We want to show the hard life of gay men, and it represents a brilliant scientist, the physiology imprisoned. We want to show the hard life of a female homosexual, and we see the unemployed lady who somehow bred with and that, wanting her back, comes on extreme measures: exposes her homosexuality, depriving of parental rights. So his feminism. But not the priority of the film which will leave him.
Write a review for this movie is not more interesting than to watch it, but the number of negative reviews of the proportion of positive just outraged. And, according to their contents, all suddenly became devoted fans of the atmosphere of the fifties and elegant lesbians. Well, well, my objectivity innocent, despite the General irritability for against this film, because I saw it 2 times, how can the decent critic, reducing the possibility of the impact of benefactors (mood before viewing, a place, abstract...), "Dull lesbian romance" (quoting Armond white) so and remained dull lesbian romance. So, actually, that's about it.
NIT-picking to the story. Starts this film scene, which seems to the time is not needed: it doesn't intrigue us, it gives us some need further information, in simple words, it take takes no thought. This stage of the future of the main characters, and later plot to it gets, but the futility of it exactly the same as and most of the rest of the scenes, so nothing but the unbridled desire of the Director to standard timekeeping, this design explain. Further, there is a fatal acquaintance, but I'm afraid the word "fatal" is too loud for the film, which is not able to arouse emotions. What we know about Teresa? She the clerk, she enjoys taking pictures and she's limp, not have their own opinions, but cute! girl which has a guy, he it didn't sleep... for some reason (the woman's forty with a child Teresa gave after three days of meeting(+/-), but maybe I something not know about a sharp decline of unavailability in a lesbian relationship)... and it is inadequate (seriously, probably sexual abstinence made him possessed by against Theresa, a personality disorder was deprived of sequential reactions in the apparent disregard for with her goes something like: — You tell me not interested. — marry me!). What we know about Carol? Have she has a baby, her marriage somehow falls apart, and she has a girlfriend, part-time godmother daughter, part-time lesbian. And, despite the external independence and annoying arrogance (which the majority refers to as elegance), it same the lost sheep, as and there's that unwittingly tells us her friend, throwing in a roundabout her husband he was surrounded by only his friends. The question arises, what hurt Carol to take matters in their own hands? Just besides this "terrible" act of her husband us no mention other blunders that would have served as motives for the divorce, i.e., it was really important in her life. That touches of homosexuality in this situation, it here is in favor of Kate, i.e. Carol (no difference), so as in this situation obviously, it is still before the meeting with my husband knew about their orientation, because, according to age daughters and most Kate, they got married far after her puberty, the first and the second of love just says elegant Carol in the status of the lost sheep. Information about characters in both cases, too little, and it is questionable, and, if you talk about the causes of the monotony of the film, this catches eyes first. To the same characters are not so little, and given that as a result, no one happened enough to open it explicit oversight of the Director. So, characters like we have understood their complete lack of backstory, emotions are not cause. What do we dialogues? Nothing good. Each replica of the primitive, the dialogues are empty, they for the most part component of everyday courtesy. The same conversations between Carol and Therese in the death — to convince us (even try) to the sincerity of passion/love, erupted for three/four days tortured, like it not fit with each other people who are trying for some reason to keep the conversation going. If you declare something in common (love music, photos) then here the audience so are not interested to listen to them about how and say that the heroines, judging from their fresh faces. If we talk about logic of the actions of the characters that already mentioned, often it is missing. For example, how, in your opinion, will go a loving mother, which claim (through counsel) that her husband have decided to apply for the prohibition of its meetings with the daughter because of her homosexuality? Go to the man the clarification of a situation? Begin to prepare your defense? Try to meet my daughter readiness to argue the absurdity of the allegations? No well, there's obviously she will meet with his girlfriend-a lesbian, then to go to the journey another friend-a lesbian to do with her sex in the Motel. Or even a wonderful scene where Carol response harassment of her husband declares that the drunk, without hesitation after helping his daughter on the back seat of the car he will lead.
Acting achievements. cate Blanchett here's how cate Blanchett in Jasmine, only to force the poor script and directing is absolutely not implemented may be said, the shadow of the Jasmine. With regards to Rooney Mara I hope pital, because to write about the adverse impact from the outside is not become a only to be expected: not impressed. The rest of the cast still not been. The presence of two, and not one of the suitors Theresa, I did discovered for myself only after the second viewing, they colorless in this harmony film.
What sort of advantages. Soundtrack want to call good, but, so as the idea of it ought to promote the emergence of emotions in viewer, there are legitimate doubts. However, this can be attributed to an unfortunate accompaniment. To the same the chronotope it matches. The spirit announced time seasoned perfectly, atmosphere workshop, only the film (pardon the pun) not atmospheric. It I what, with whatever precision was transferred to the fiftieth city of new York, any emotion (that movie makes me shamelessly repeated), the picture is not cause.
total, the plot is stupid, but with the favourites for eager (+1 to tolerance) critics the topic of homosexuality, even better — with the subject of immoral infringement of their dogmatic rights our ancestors. The characters do not written stupid. The dialogues are primitive and therefore boring. The film is not said did not show anything new and was able to trigger only increasing the anticipation of the ending. Acting is mediocre. Music normal. The atmosphere is normal.
of 3 10
for all the achievements.
P. S. I'm not homophobic.
