Loved (1997) User Reviews

A slight and detached character study

[fredrikgunerius · 6/10 · 13 April 2022]

This obscure drama film about a former talented swimmer who tries to piece her life together after a troubled relationship is so aloof and uncommunicative that you feel like you've snuck into a party you weren't invited to. Writer/director Erin Dignam arguably aims for authenticity and depth by being offish, and it works in the sense that Robin Wright Penn's lead character comes off as remarkably true, even if she still isn't particularly interesting. William Hurt plays her lawyer in an even more introspective manner than we usually see him. His character seems absentminded, almost like a distraction, until we ultimately get a little glimpse into his own demons, which seem to gravitate him towards Wright Penn. It's all a somewhat slight and detached character study, but at least it's an actual study. The women are in focus here, which may be some sort of accomplishment in itself, and the film tries to discuss issues which it doesn't claim to have a definitive answer to beforehand. For that Dignam and her cast deserve credit, even if the end product is artistically lacking and never quite comes alive. Sean Penn produced and appears in an allegorical cameo.

Incredibly boring and dull psychodrama.

[vert2712 · 4/10 · 2 August 1998]

When an abusive man's girlfriend ends up in a wheelchair and another one jumps in front of a car to end her misery, attorney William Hurt decides to bring him to trial. Emotionally-scarred Robin Wright is called to testify at a court hearing against her former lover.

Sounds like the beginning of a good courtroom drama, and with a cast that also includes Sean Penn, Joanna Cassidy and Amy Madigan, how can you go wrong?

A lot, actually. What we have here is a strong contender for the title of Most Boring Film of the Decade. I honestly can't recall seeing a duller, slower, more sophorific piece of filmmaking.

Does director/writer Erin Dignam think real people talk and act like these characters? I'm all for psychological dramas and introspective stories but they have to be somewhat interesting. Even depressing stories can be compelling, but compared to this, Ingmar Bergman's films look like Die Hard meets Rambo. This film is so sleep-inducing, it could be used by dentists as an anesthetic.

Don't take my word, see it and judge for yourself. But make sure you have plenty of coffee available, or you may never reach the end with your eyes open.

Underdeveloped

[subcityii · 2 July 2002]

I saw this film while voting for the Independent Spirit Awards and I must say it had many of my favorite performers. William Hurt, Amy Madigan, Sean Penn (whose company helped make the movie), Joanna Cassidy, Paul Dooley and Jennifer Rubin is like a dream cast to me. I couldn't wait for them to be put to good use. Sadly, they were given almost nothing interesting to do. It has a good setup, it is about the damage that happens in abusive relationships, specifically what people are willing to endure in order to feel loved. The project was not structured or developed very well, however. I think the script needed a few more drafts because the situations needed more urgency or more weight. Most good independent films take you on an emotional or spiritual journey and this film just did not do that.

S & M portrayed as 'love'.

[lailanamdarkhan · 3/10 · 20 June 2021]

The main character is clearly groomed by the b/f from an early age ( 16) . During her questioning by the lawyer she refers to the inculcated guilt experienced during her childhood, yet her sisters appeared to be well adjusted adults. Meeting a coercive controller at such an early age Hedda becomes besotted and we understand wants acceptance and willing to accept punishment and blame for the actions of the man she links up with. He captures her... is an understatement as happens in manipulative coercive relations. Where the perpetrator has total control and his victim is used abused and convinced she is responsible for his violence and rages, A dark series of imponderable conversations throughout this movie between Hedda and her lawyer and finally the man responsible , who appears to have made a career out of psychologically controlling women.

We learn very little about him or his other victims .. just a pointless movie that could have unearthed a great deal more about how masculine coercive control blights women's lives and leaves them emotionally scared with life long PTSD akin to a soldier who has endured grievous combat.

Confusing

[dlschuch · 1/10 · 30 March 2021]

This movie has the most ridiculous dialogue. It was like walking into the middle of a conversation about something you never heard of and people you don't know. And that never changed.

Booooooooooring

[xlars · 3/10 · 19 January 2002]

This must be the singular most boring movie that I've ever seen. I can't remember a movie being so slow to reach a punchline that simply never excists. The whole movie should simply never have been made.

Hated !

[elshikh4 · 3/10 · 3 November 2007]

First off.. AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

Ok, now we can talk.

Despite my hatred for the shown type of human (Hedda Amerson / Robin Wright Penn) as a tenderhearted girl who never turns to seek revenge on the man who she loved, even though he drove her to committing suicide (2 times!) as his first wife, and hit his second wife to the extent that he paralyzed her!!, and then hit his third wife till he killed her!!! And our very good-natured girl just couldn't even hate him a bit! Despite my hatred for that, I hated, and hated, and hated the way that this story was told also!

The movie tried to be as different as its main character. So writer / director (Erin Dignam) didn't put this series of confessions, or justifications for her absolute love, as long sequences in another psychotherapy movie plot. No, she made such a drama, with a sense of thrill, by transporting it to the courtroom instead of the psychiatrist's room. However, the movie had no way to unite us with whatever it wanted to say, or consolidated its case by anything solid, to end up as delicate and fragile like its lead!

Honestly, it lacked cohesiveness, if not lost it. The shots were too long, the pace was deadly slow, and the important information came like a few parsimonious drops. And I'm sure that no artist in the world wants his work to be as soporific as this movie!

Moreover, the lead character, as forgiveness in a human form, was really cold, or not convincing. You'll find yourself screaming so many times: "This is masochism. And it's a crime; you are the victim in it, and the criminal!!". So when she acquits that mean killer, and make him back to society, by this too soft, too weeping and too emotional witness--then he'll do it again and again. Well, lady, this is a man slayer, or - at least - a scary psychopath, who looks like a loving kind of guy; which makes him more dangerous as a killer. However, you're too blinded by love to see that. Hence, this is not love anymore, this is an illness which means that this cute girl needs help very fast as the same as her brutal love!

Further than that, the character of the lawyer (K. D. Dietrickson / William Hurt) seemed a good person from the start, but without one thing that changed in him in the end, for better or for worse. Look at him in that final scene, when he told the lead in great emotionality: "I've learned from you.. a lot ..but I'll tell you about that.. later"!! For me, this is a very weak scene. And when it comes to very weak scenes, then nothing can top those 2 scenes where the lead was swimming in the pool (Fully nude?!). OH MY GOD! If the movie wanted to express visually that she was as pure and placid as that water, then it was artistically pedant. Though, had something to express, or not, both ways IT WAS OBSCENE AND BORING!

And you find those guys who applaud and glorify the movie, who I dare them all to tell me whatever they learned from it, or understood of it. And even if they could, let them be that objective once to tell me, or themselves, what were the defects of their beloved movie then?!

Based on the above, the movie mixes: a character that makes you ailing + a plot and a style which are whether feeble or pedant (or both!) + a well-meaning message that's said by the wrong writing and directing till it turns into ill-intentioned. And the result is: a torturing journey to a provocative goal!

PS: The intro scene of (Sean Penn), as the pathetic image which we all turn into without the presence of affectionate lover, or tolerant persons like (Hedda Amerson) among us--was such a fine scene, that looked separate from the whole movie, as the only perfect thing here, which would make an ugly irony if you compared it to all what came after it.

When words are said, they spoil everything...... Miller's mind is still wondering...

[jesusonair · 9/10 · 27 January 2003]

There are things you never can tell why you like them. Why you let this CD hypnotize you,make you listen to it, why you're taken away with that movie. You can't describe it, can't put it into words. It's the air, the atmosphere, the charm of it that takes over you. I felt that in "Loved". And i loved this movie.

And I'd like to thank Robin Wright Penn for acting so heavenly she made me forget to breathe and watch Loved like something that i experience in flesh-with my senses,with my mind,with my heart. And - William Hurt - he's got a flair, he's so unbelievably talented-he never lets you down.

stunning, daring, and original

[Michael Bennett Cohn · 9/10 · 5 June 1999]

I saw this movie at the Seattle Film Festival before it was released...if it ever was released. It has got to be one of the best movies I've ever seen, but it's a terrible shame that it didn't ever find its audience. Daring story of a woman who refuses to cooperate with a lawyer who is prosecuting her blatantly manipulative and very dangerous ex-boyfriend. The character played by Robyn Wright Penn is of a type rarely seen, or at least rarely examined, on screen. Rarely have I been so completely taken in emotionally by a film. Amazing.

Food for the soul and mind

[vandave0 · 4 November 2001]

This film came to me accidentally, but maybe that's the only way something with this much emotional depth can. It's not slow and boring - it breathes. And it allows one to breathe. The pace is appropriate and won't leave one fidgeting like the endless underwater blue fairy scene in A.I., or Ed Harris's pounding of his ex-wife's chest for the hundredth time in The Abyss' ridiculous resuscitation scene. It has an enchanting rhythm, like the Accidental Tourist - it reminded me about William Hurt's under-appreciated (he rarely immediately pops to mind when thinking of our greatest actors), yet luminous interior talent . If you're a sensitive person who likes to be absorbed and also participate intellectually in a movie, check it out.

Explained

[Erick-12 · 9/10 · 29 October 2005]

_Loved_ was written and directed by Erin Dignam. Produced by Sean Penn, who makes a great cameo appearance early in the story as a schizoid character who desperately asks for emotional help from a lawyer-cum-psychologist played by William Hurt. The Penn character disappears after this brief speech about how we're all magnets attracting and repelling each other, filled with defensive fear, setting up barriers and protective distances which go against our purposes, and that there is no help from anywhere else, and that there is no faith beyond love.... This rambling nervous speech by a "madman" on the edge is the most overt statement of the theme of this film. The lawyer played by Hurt does hug him and Penn asks if he is an angel. "No." This same question is asked later by Robin Wright Penn's character, the main character that is. (Penn then walks back toward a remote house and in the background, and if you listen carefully you'll hear someone far away calling a "Michael" to come in for breakfast-- seems he lives in a group home where the staff take care of him.)

Main story is about an ambiguous case of domestic violence, of spouse abuse. Young man is brought to court in the name of 3 past girlfriends who all have the same tragic profile of hospitalizations and self-abuse or suicide tendencies.

Robin Wright Penn character is eccentric, direct, sensitive, and disciplined as a swimmer, honest, yet a bit confused about the abusive relationship. She defends it as the best thing that ever happened to her, but everyone around her is convinced that she's a victim. The film avoids taking obvious sides on this, by giving both sides a passionate voice. In the courtroom showdown, Robin's character is asked point blank how she would describe their relationship: "I wouldn't" describe it is her considered answer. The abuser seems to be a sensitive and overly intense man who was "tryng to break through her skin to the real self inside". His extreme magnetism is to attempt to get too attached, too united with a lover -- more than is humanly possible, and in frustration at this impossibility, he explodes in rages. The human condition compels attraction and repels it simultaneously. A sick kind of intimacy to be sure, but his quest for an absolute oneness inspires both devotion and confused self-destruction. After the trial scenes, he admits that he has wronged others and that he is now afraid to get attached to anyone: "I can't afford to" he cries. There is no hope.

Yet this fear of attachment and the self-blaming is echoed in a much more subtle manner in the lawyer's life. He blames himself for his own divorce and now is also afraid to love anyone especially. Instead he "loves" everyone equally, but also sees the world as full of enemies who need to be prosecuted, which is his career. It is his own existential suffering that allows him to see so clearly into the confusions of Robin's character. She later realizes this and likewise asks him to confess.

This sounds less interesting than the way it actually comes across as an emotional film about emotional intensity and our deadening withdrawal from the severe and unstable results of such relationships. There are a series of interesting contrasts set up throughout the relationships in this film and their transformations.

Robin's character is insistent upon the precise language she needs for her experience --"hit" as opposed to "strike"; "stepped into" as opposed to "jumped off" etc., yet she is in denial about her year and a half of insomnia that drove her to attempt suicide. It started right after she heard that the abusive-sensitive man hurt his new girlfriend more than her: which she understood in her private nightmare as proof that he loved the new woman more. She has come to equate the degree of violence with the degree of genuine connection, and feels "envy". At this point she lost touch with reality and became afraid of the dark: "the table was not a table." She argues this point extensively, but the Hurt lawyer- psychotherapist seems to outwit her. It is "her state of mind that is the essence of this case" he says.

Nevertheless, her view affects him a lot. He seems to be falling for her--he's a lonely divorcée. He seems unconsciously to want to prosecute himself through the abuser for some untold failure in himself. It is suggested that he was unfaithful to his wife before. While not an abuser, he does blame himself for the divorce-- he's now "stopped believing in himself". The phrase "a table is not a table" is used throughout, explained in the first courtroom scene, to mean the state of mind in which you lose faith in something you trusted--in somebody. He saves her from her confusion and denial, yet in the end it is suggested that she will save him in turn from his own loss. In the final scene, we cannot tell whether she will pull him into the pool or he will pull her out -- precisely because it is both at once on the emotional level.

Along with "Kissed" "Loved" is the other sleeper of 1997.

[heedon · 17 April 2000]

If "Titanic" is what moves you, then skip "Loved." If you prefer slow-paced, thoughtful drama without special effects, noise or guns, where you have to put a lot of pieces together yourself, this is your movie. I don't believe that a movie is to be seen, half-digested and compartmentalized after one viewing, certainly not if it has any of the elements of subtle poignancy that this movie has. And because they are so good, I want more from writer-director, Erin Dignam and the lead actors, William Hurt and Robin Wright. I like looking at William Hurt and at Robin Wright even when they say nothing, when they struggle to find the right words. They can take all the time in the world, they are so impressive in their thoughtful solitude. Speak of a mismatched pair: a tall, dowdy lawyer of scholarly mien and a beautiful waif of athletic prowess. In this movie there is a chance to see if opposites attract after all. William Hurt and Robin Wright deliver flawless acting. He is a California prosecutor taking on a battered woman case, and Wright is the more than willing victim, the reluctant witness that has to be subpoenaed to testify. Imagine a sunny, naive, diffident, young California woman moving to New York City to get away from a first teen-age entanglement that leaves her damaged physically and emotionally. That's Wright character, Hedda. A one-time Olympic swimming contender, she returns to California for the prosecution of her former abusive boy-friend, who is wont to repeat his aggressive behaviour with others. Hurt is recruited to prosecute this difficult case, to end, or at least, to put a dent in this man's damage. If there are flaws in the film, they lie in no information being given about Wright's life in New York, and what it is that has hurt the prosecutor's past life and career. He seems to have lost his way but we don't know why. There is only so much reading between the lines one can do though it could be me that doesn't read well. Wright's character may be too naive to be believable, but on the other hand, it is called the battered spouse "syndrome." In the loose ends and in the space between thelines lie the beauty of this movie. Something unsaid may be happening between the prosecutor (Hurt) and his witness (Wright). Two lovable, damaged people may or may not be inching, reaching out to each other. Two near-fully realized characters are presented to us to make of them what we will because the writer-director won't give the store away. I prefer it that way. "Loved" is a compelling theatre piece, perhaps in the vein of an "Oleanna." In "Loved" the dark courtoom scenes are set within those of a bright, sunshiny Santa Monica and Redondo Beach. You may feel like walking around Santa Monica after when the movie ends. I do. Adventure seekers, romance novel readers and fans of "Godfather 15; 16; 17," ad nauseum, need not apply.

A film about tragic ideas of love

[coradenice · 9/10 · 1 March 2007]

I was absolutely fascinated by the story and its characters, mainly Hedda, of course. It was quite a challenge, both intellectually and emotionally, to step in this odd version of love and romantic connection and see the way the characters relate to love and their strange definition and understanding of emotional bonding, which takes extreme, violent turns. What I find striking is that there are many who might identify themselves with Hedda's ex-boyfriend in terms of all that longing for flawless complementing and wholeness with the loved one, however, it is the specific expression of this feeling, as well as a certain healthy state of passivity, that makes the difference and separates people on the safe side of the edge from those on the other side, who fall, hurt and get hurt because they no longer possess an objective sense of what is tangible. When Hedda says: "The table was no longer a table", we may as well understand that her skin was no longer skin, a matter of skin tissues, when his ex was battering her, it may as well have been paper or cotton, and that the pain she was feeling in the process was not actually pain, but equaled love and reaching out for it. So, the limits between concepts like love, pain, sharing and intimacy, and their definitions, as well as the usual adjectives/ stereotypes attached to them get just as fuzzy and confused as the characters. The characters are placed on the scene and left on their own to grow throughout the story and to reveal themselves progressively, quite similar to a canvas painting process. The movie has a beautifully slow, bluesy rhythm, with moving flash-backs and a heart-breaking climax when Hedda makes her final confession regarding her personal feeling of privilege in the context of her ex-lover's violence. Robin Wright Penn makes a terrific job of portraying Hedda as a graceful, pretty fragile and floaty presence of a kind, tender nature, a woman who would have been just a regular person if it hadn't been for her past relationship and the emotional and psychological entanglements derived from it. Her ex is not the bad guy of the story, but a tragic soul who simply doesn't know where to stop and can't conceive drawing lines between the separate selves and territories when loving someone deeply.

A thoughtful examination of some aspects of love, and worth your time

[Behr-2 · 5 April 1999]

A previous commentist accurately summarized the plot as follows: When an abusive man's girlfriend ends up in a wheelchair and another one jumps in front of a car to end her misery, attorney William Hurt decides to bring him to trial. Emotionally-scarred Robin Wright is called to testify at a court hearing against her former lover.

However, the rest of his comments indicate that it's not just adolescent Americans who want movie stories neatly finished by the end of the movie. I found this film to be a thoughtful examination of several aspects of love and dependency. It provides no easy answers to the questions posed and actually requires the viewer to pay attention and THINK. Performances are uniformly excellent, especially Robin Penn Wright's in the principal role.

An incredible film

[Katrina · 8/10 · 27 March 2010]

This film affected me on a deep visceral level. I saw this movie at the Seattle International Film Festival and would love to see it again. Robin Wright's performance captured the strength of openness and vulnerability. Hedda's question to William Hurt's character, "Do you love me enough yet?" was quite haunting. And to her mother, when she asked why Hedda hadn't told her about her pain (if I remember correctly), "because you aren't strong enough," poignantly portrays a soul that has been emotionally used and abused from a young age and learned to take on others' emotional needs at her own expense - especially a woman who has true empathy.

Very nice film

[gardinerg · 8 September 2002]

It has been a while since I have seen this film (saw the premier in Toronto), but I really enjoyed it and was very impressed with the unique take on abusive and destructive relationships that it explored. I strongly reccomend it and if anything might dissappoint the general viewer, it is that it takes time to understand the characters and does not judge them or box them into good or bad.

Geo-

thoughtful

[rustle-rizz · 8/10 · 13 May 2003]

'Loved' is not edge of the seat stuff. It is a grown-up film which examines the nature of love and infatuation. The script is beautifully crafted and provides insight into the machinations of it's individual characters. Robin Wright-Penn and William Hurt undergo a professional relationship which seems to promise something more. The question raised is about commitment and whether that commitment necessitates losing something in oneself. The language of the film is as much in the incidental actions and gestures as in the dialogue. William Hurt stands by the pool, fully clothed, he offers his hand to help R W-P out, she beckons him in. If that is too subtle for you, steer well clear. But, if nothing else, do catch the first five minutes for the brilliant Sean Penn cameo.

I want to see it again.

[kyleroberts · 27 July 2004]

It's interesting how depending on the maturity of each viewer, there are so positive and so negative comments at the time. This proves one more time how differently we perceive things. I saw this movie, maybe 3-4 years ago. I must admit, I did not experience any feeling of excitement while watching it, nevertheless it did catch my attention. When it ended the only idea that I was left with was that love is like a drug... if you become addicted ... it can ruin you. Robin's character response to "if you were to go back in time what would you do?" , "I would do everything just the same"... was tattooed to my brain. This story needed to be told and it couldn't have been better told. This is my opinion.

Great movie, if you understand what it tries to say...

[PipsHeritage · 8/10 · 15 August 2005]

It's a very good movie, if you are intelligent enough to get the point. If you are quite shallow, you will be bored by it (but then a lot of people who are used to todays (too) high-pased movies are easily bored). It tries to say that in a destructive relationship it takes 'two to tango'. The abused person almost agrees with the abuse if she (or he) doesn't guard her/his own boundaries and draws a line. Sometimes - and it seems strange - people feel safe in that kind of a relationship, because it's the only kind of love they know (if they have been abused by their parents f.i.). It's very brave of the character of Robin Wright Penn to not only point the finger at her abusive ex-boyfriend, but also holds herself responsible for how she let herself be treated. She needed the intensity to FEEL, like (she thought) that love can only be love when it hurts. But the intensity had a destructive outcome for her mental health in the end, it drained her, wore her out... and her recovery took a long, long time... and still... About the hesitating attraction between William Hurt's character and Robin Wright Penn's character: it's a very delicate and realistic observation how two people, who both have a hard time trusting someone again, slowly open their hearts to each other. I think it's very moving to witness that. And Sean Penn's small cameo (as someone from probably a nearby mental health institution who has become victimized by, I think, a too intense relationship) is excellent; his lines are an intro of the story which we are about to see. A brave story with a controversial look at things.

How does a teen age love story carry on in life

[yo-3 · 10 September 1998]

The first love is the toughest. You'll never forget, sets the standards for all of the relations in the future. Some first love never finish, and they 're carried out throughout life like little secrets that we hide from everybody. That's what 'Loved' is about. I don't think our friend from Milan has ever had a direct experience in the matter.

Robin Wright plays the girl who finally seems in peace of mind apart from when it comes to her very first boyfriend. He's still around, victim of love, victim of himself.

This well thought court-house love drama is sometimes too etherious, like teen age love. You most relate to appreciate: I did, and I even tried to buy the film for an ancillary but the distributor would't return calls. I recommend it.

interesting

[carriepookie · 9/10 · 26 July 2001]

I feel that this movie will not appeal to everyone, but I think it does very well at tapping into the emotions of women who have been abused. The irrational thoughts that one uses to try to rationalize the abuse they suffer at the hands of someone they want to believe loves them. Robin Wright Penn is excellent!

I almost did not watch this when I saw the low rating.

[denise-882-139023 · 10/10 · 18 September 2021]

I found this an easy watch. The time passed quickly as it kept me interested from start to finish.

William Hurt and Robin Wright were spot on and the story unfolded perfectly. Enough information was given for a viewer to understand the underlying emotions.

I enjoy films that allow you to piece together what has happened, is happening and may happen. Excellent.