Frida is a biopic, as decadent and beautiful as the art of Frida Kahlo. I can't imagine how you could make it any other way. Yes, we follow Frida through her dysfunctional and broken relationship with both Diego Rivera and the international socialist movement. But the way this story is told is key. The editing and cinematography pays enormous tribute to Frida's paintings and the genre of art that she represents. Salma Hayek is tremendous as Frida. Alfred Molina is tremendous as Diego. It's thoroughly exquisite.
314 Reviews
Splendid movie about two excellent Mexican painters and their troublesome relationship
ma-cortes5 May 2005
The movie deals with the biography of Frida Kalho (well performed by Salma Hayek , though Laura San Giacomo was originally set to play her but was dropped when fans objected to a non-Mexican playing the role) who after a terrible accident with a trolley causes herself a crippling injury , then she gets away from her parents (Roger Rees and Patricia Spinola) to live on the paintings . She falls in love with famed muralist Diego Rivera (Alfred Molina , he gained 50 lbs , 23 kg , for this character) who bears a separated marriage (to Valeria Golino) . Later on , Frida is wedded to Diego and the troubles come out .
The yarn relies heavily upon their tempestuous marriage , because the different artistic temperaments burst , creating a stormy relation . The picture is correctly based on historic deeds and even Edward Norton did an uncredited rewrite of the script . Thus , it appears Leon Trosky - who has romance to Frida- , but he's murdered with a hatchet by Ramon Mercader and then is framed Diego Rivera , though later being absolved . Besides , there are several famous people : Siqueiros (Antonio Banderas) , Nelson Rockefeller (Edward Norton) , Leon Trosky (Geoffrey Rush) and others very secondaries such as Andre Breton or Josephine Baker . Frida is specially known by her mustachioed and one-brow paintings and Rivera by his impressive murals and one of them was ordered to break by Nelson Rockefeller but reflected to famous communists on the ¨Rockefeller Center¨ . The film was perfectly directed by Julie Taymor and includes magnificent cinematography by Rodrigo Prieto as when imaginatively brings to life the scenes on the Kalho's paintings , where the color is glimmer and spellbound . The motion picture attained success and achieved enough box office , obtaining two Oscars for the awesome Musical Score (Elliot Goldenthal) and Make-up . Rating : Above average . Well Worth watching.
The yarn relies heavily upon their tempestuous marriage , because the different artistic temperaments burst , creating a stormy relation . The picture is correctly based on historic deeds and even Edward Norton did an uncredited rewrite of the script . Thus , it appears Leon Trosky - who has romance to Frida- , but he's murdered with a hatchet by Ramon Mercader and then is framed Diego Rivera , though later being absolved . Besides , there are several famous people : Siqueiros (Antonio Banderas) , Nelson Rockefeller (Edward Norton) , Leon Trosky (Geoffrey Rush) and others very secondaries such as Andre Breton or Josephine Baker . Frida is specially known by her mustachioed and one-brow paintings and Rivera by his impressive murals and one of them was ordered to break by Nelson Rockefeller but reflected to famous communists on the ¨Rockefeller Center¨ . The film was perfectly directed by Julie Taymor and includes magnificent cinematography by Rodrigo Prieto as when imaginatively brings to life the scenes on the Kalho's paintings , where the color is glimmer and spellbound . The motion picture attained success and achieved enough box office , obtaining two Oscars for the awesome Musical Score (Elliot Goldenthal) and Make-up . Rating : Above average . Well Worth watching.
Julie Taymor, a director of taste and sensibility...
Nazi_Fighter_David18 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
'Frida' is a rich and passionate account of two celebrated Mexican artists, whose lives were bound up with major events of the 20th century-the Mexican and Russian Revolutions... The film takes us at the center of the art world in one of the most tumultuous alliance between two painters, an alliance filled with joy and heartbreak, love and betrayal...
Frida and Diego are two dynamic artists of extraordinary and diverse talents... While Diego's work is more public and monumental, Frida's paintings are grotesque and intimate on a much smaller scale...
The film chronicles Frida's audacious self-introduction to the great muralist Diego Rivera, and her physical ailments... There is pain in this woman's life, a pain she don't deserve to have, a pain no one deserves to have... There's a line in the film where Kahlo says, 'at the end of the day, we can all endure much more than we think we can.' and I think this one line resumes everything about her...
Salma Hayek proves herself that she's more than just another pretty face... Salma is full of vigor as the angry strong-willed female artist caught in a net of pain... It's pleasing to see Hayek in a production where she is totally confidant, sexy and lusty in an uncomplicated way... Salma captures the spirit of Frida and plays it with heart and style, longing for the healing touch... She dances a provocative tango with Ashley Judd, and goes to Paris to explore her bisexual side...
The chemistry between Salma and Molina is terrific... Her passion for art is overtaken by her passion for him... She expresses her emotions by teasing him, by playing practical jokes, by exciting the jealousy of his wonderful wife, Lupe Marin (Valeria Golino).
But Frida remains in Rivera's shadow... She calls herself "a charming amateur." She focuses on her expressive self portraits of her physical pain, anger, and disappointment... Yet while viewers are left with the impression that there is undoubtedly more to Frida's life than what appears on screen, what we get instead is a love story, a tale of Frida's romantic, and tempestuous union to the unfaithful husband she marries twice and never stopped to love...
London-born actor Alfred Molina is absolutely splendid as the lovable Rivera... He is a well-known womanizer who can never be faithful to any woman... Diego is a painter of conviction... A revolutionary painter who believes in Frida's anguished brush, and championed her work... He decides to create paintings which would speak directly to the common people...
In a motion picture that sweeps from the late 1920s into the 1950s, Julie Taymor proves to be a director of taste and sensitivity... She captures the mood of the moment with genuine flair and style... Her imagery is exciting, and we are convinced that we are seeing Mexico in the first half of the 1900s, with its native markets, textiles, music, and food... Julie Taymor infuses it with elements of Frida's artistic creativity, bringing much of her work to life... Her film was nominated for six Academy Awards...
Vague references to the political struggle between Trotsky and Stalin make their way into the script... The film ignores Siqueiros' central role in the unsuccessful attempt on Trotsky's life in 1940... But the motion picture details the mistake of Nelson Rockefeller commissioning Rivera a huge fresco for his public hall...
Frida and Diego are two dynamic artists of extraordinary and diverse talents... While Diego's work is more public and monumental, Frida's paintings are grotesque and intimate on a much smaller scale...
The film chronicles Frida's audacious self-introduction to the great muralist Diego Rivera, and her physical ailments... There is pain in this woman's life, a pain she don't deserve to have, a pain no one deserves to have... There's a line in the film where Kahlo says, 'at the end of the day, we can all endure much more than we think we can.' and I think this one line resumes everything about her...
Salma Hayek proves herself that she's more than just another pretty face... Salma is full of vigor as the angry strong-willed female artist caught in a net of pain... It's pleasing to see Hayek in a production where she is totally confidant, sexy and lusty in an uncomplicated way... Salma captures the spirit of Frida and plays it with heart and style, longing for the healing touch... She dances a provocative tango with Ashley Judd, and goes to Paris to explore her bisexual side...
The chemistry between Salma and Molina is terrific... Her passion for art is overtaken by her passion for him... She expresses her emotions by teasing him, by playing practical jokes, by exciting the jealousy of his wonderful wife, Lupe Marin (Valeria Golino).
But Frida remains in Rivera's shadow... She calls herself "a charming amateur." She focuses on her expressive self portraits of her physical pain, anger, and disappointment... Yet while viewers are left with the impression that there is undoubtedly more to Frida's life than what appears on screen, what we get instead is a love story, a tale of Frida's romantic, and tempestuous union to the unfaithful husband she marries twice and never stopped to love...
London-born actor Alfred Molina is absolutely splendid as the lovable Rivera... He is a well-known womanizer who can never be faithful to any woman... Diego is a painter of conviction... A revolutionary painter who believes in Frida's anguished brush, and championed her work... He decides to create paintings which would speak directly to the common people...
In a motion picture that sweeps from the late 1920s into the 1950s, Julie Taymor proves to be a director of taste and sensitivity... She captures the mood of the moment with genuine flair and style... Her imagery is exciting, and we are convinced that we are seeing Mexico in the first half of the 1900s, with its native markets, textiles, music, and food... Julie Taymor infuses it with elements of Frida's artistic creativity, bringing much of her work to life... Her film was nominated for six Academy Awards...
Vague references to the political struggle between Trotsky and Stalin make their way into the script... The film ignores Siqueiros' central role in the unsuccessful attempt on Trotsky's life in 1940... But the motion picture details the mistake of Nelson Rockefeller commissioning Rivera a huge fresco for his public hall...
gripping performance by Hayek
Buddy-517 December 2002
Salma Hayek (uni-brow and all) gives a genuinely great performance as `Frida,' the Mexican artist who is more famous, perhaps, as the wife of Diego Rivera than as a painter in her own right - although Rivera himself always insisted that it was Frida who had the greater talent.
Frida Kahlo was a woman who endured a life of crippling pain caused by a trolley accident in her youth, yet her innate energy, passion and love of life - as well as her enormous abilities as a painter - allowed her to overcome that daunting obstacle to achieve a measure of fame and recognition. What she was not quite so successful in overcoming was her strenuous love/hate relationship with Rivera, which came to occupy her time and her life almost as much as her painting. In many ways, `Frida' is a typical artist bio, highly reminiscent of other recent films in the genre such as `Pollock' and `Surviving Picasso,' both of which also dealt with the serial philandering of their male artist figures. `Frida,' however, since it is focused more intensely on the woman's perspective, offers a few new insights into that seemingly inevitable theme. Frida, in many ways, prides herself on her independent, fiery nature, yet when Rivera becomes a part of her life, she quickly succumbs to his seductive charms. She marries Rivera even though she knows he is constitutionally incapable of remaining faithful to her. Thus, she sets herself up for a life of misery with a man she is utterly incapable of living without. That the relationship is one of utter co-dependency is demonstrated by the fact that Rivera, even after their numerous breakups, keeps coming back to his one true love.
Based on the Hayden Herrera biography, the Clancy Sigal/Diane Lake/Gregory Nava/Anna Thomas screenplay doesn't paint Frida as some sort of passive victim of her own weaknesses nor as some sort of plaster saint martyr who was entirely guiltless in her own troubled life. We see, for instance, the hypocrisy inherent in her own romantic dalliances, principally her bisexual flings with other women and even the affair she conducts with none other than Trotsky himself during the period of his exile in Mexico (right before his assassination). We empathize with Frida because she functions as such a compelling figure in the context of the story, but we are never allowed to forget that she is a flawed human being, as capable of making a mess of her life as any of the men who generally occupy the lead position in these stories.
If for no other reason, `Frida' is worth seeing for the marvelous sense of history it provides, chronicling the turbulent period of the 1920's and 1930's when socialism was the `in' cause for the art world to rally around - at least until the arrival of Stalin when the pipe dream of a worker's state and a classless society fell victim to the murderous brutality of a regime more totalitarian in nature than the one it had replaced. Director Julie Taymor keeps the political issues of the era front and center, perfectly integrating them with the tumultuous relationship at the story's core. We witness, for instance, Rivera's struggle with Nelson Rockefeller when the latter commissions Rivera to paint a mural in one of his buildings. When Rockefeller, the personification of capitalism, balks at Rivera's glorification of Lenin in the painting, Rivera is forced to reexamine his own commitment to the cause he so vehemently espouses (the film makes an interesting companion piece to `The Cradle Will Rock' from a few years back). We also get to see some of the lip service paid by these artists to the socialist cause, as they live the good life among the elite pampered classes, often at the expense of the very workers whose rights they so loudly proclaim in their work.
As Frida, Hayek literally carries the film. Tender and vulnerable one moment, she can become fiery and self-confident the next. Hayak also captures much of the excruciating physical torment that Frida was forced to endure during her lifetime - and which often became the central subject of much of her art. Alfred Molina makes of Rivera a fascinatingly understated figure. His seeming world-weariness camouflages a tenderness and ability to love deeply, which, apparently, few in his life - apart from Frida - were ever able to see. Ashley Judd does a nice turn as one of Rivera's socialite devotees and Antonio Banderas makes his mark in his very brief appearance as David Siqueiros, a passionate socialist who accuses Rivera of kowtowing to the powers-that-be whom he claims to despise (Banderas is so good in the role that one regrets he isn't given more screen time). Geoffrey Rush, unfortunately, is not given enough time or good material to make much of an impression as Trotsky.
Taymor has had mixed results integrating Frida's works into the story. The director occasionally dabbles in surrealism by having Frida and Diego literally enter into the world of her paintings. Sometimes it works; sometimes it serves merely as a fancy distraction. Still, Taymor at least deserves credit for boldness in such scenes.
All in all, `Frida' provides a fascinating portrait of its heroine - and one of the best performances of the year to go along with it.
Frida Kahlo was a woman who endured a life of crippling pain caused by a trolley accident in her youth, yet her innate energy, passion and love of life - as well as her enormous abilities as a painter - allowed her to overcome that daunting obstacle to achieve a measure of fame and recognition. What she was not quite so successful in overcoming was her strenuous love/hate relationship with Rivera, which came to occupy her time and her life almost as much as her painting. In many ways, `Frida' is a typical artist bio, highly reminiscent of other recent films in the genre such as `Pollock' and `Surviving Picasso,' both of which also dealt with the serial philandering of their male artist figures. `Frida,' however, since it is focused more intensely on the woman's perspective, offers a few new insights into that seemingly inevitable theme. Frida, in many ways, prides herself on her independent, fiery nature, yet when Rivera becomes a part of her life, she quickly succumbs to his seductive charms. She marries Rivera even though she knows he is constitutionally incapable of remaining faithful to her. Thus, she sets herself up for a life of misery with a man she is utterly incapable of living without. That the relationship is one of utter co-dependency is demonstrated by the fact that Rivera, even after their numerous breakups, keeps coming back to his one true love.
Based on the Hayden Herrera biography, the Clancy Sigal/Diane Lake/Gregory Nava/Anna Thomas screenplay doesn't paint Frida as some sort of passive victim of her own weaknesses nor as some sort of plaster saint martyr who was entirely guiltless in her own troubled life. We see, for instance, the hypocrisy inherent in her own romantic dalliances, principally her bisexual flings with other women and even the affair she conducts with none other than Trotsky himself during the period of his exile in Mexico (right before his assassination). We empathize with Frida because she functions as such a compelling figure in the context of the story, but we are never allowed to forget that she is a flawed human being, as capable of making a mess of her life as any of the men who generally occupy the lead position in these stories.
If for no other reason, `Frida' is worth seeing for the marvelous sense of history it provides, chronicling the turbulent period of the 1920's and 1930's when socialism was the `in' cause for the art world to rally around - at least until the arrival of Stalin when the pipe dream of a worker's state and a classless society fell victim to the murderous brutality of a regime more totalitarian in nature than the one it had replaced. Director Julie Taymor keeps the political issues of the era front and center, perfectly integrating them with the tumultuous relationship at the story's core. We witness, for instance, Rivera's struggle with Nelson Rockefeller when the latter commissions Rivera to paint a mural in one of his buildings. When Rockefeller, the personification of capitalism, balks at Rivera's glorification of Lenin in the painting, Rivera is forced to reexamine his own commitment to the cause he so vehemently espouses (the film makes an interesting companion piece to `The Cradle Will Rock' from a few years back). We also get to see some of the lip service paid by these artists to the socialist cause, as they live the good life among the elite pampered classes, often at the expense of the very workers whose rights they so loudly proclaim in their work.
As Frida, Hayek literally carries the film. Tender and vulnerable one moment, she can become fiery and self-confident the next. Hayak also captures much of the excruciating physical torment that Frida was forced to endure during her lifetime - and which often became the central subject of much of her art. Alfred Molina makes of Rivera a fascinatingly understated figure. His seeming world-weariness camouflages a tenderness and ability to love deeply, which, apparently, few in his life - apart from Frida - were ever able to see. Ashley Judd does a nice turn as one of Rivera's socialite devotees and Antonio Banderas makes his mark in his very brief appearance as David Siqueiros, a passionate socialist who accuses Rivera of kowtowing to the powers-that-be whom he claims to despise (Banderas is so good in the role that one regrets he isn't given more screen time). Geoffrey Rush, unfortunately, is not given enough time or good material to make much of an impression as Trotsky.
Taymor has had mixed results integrating Frida's works into the story. The director occasionally dabbles in surrealism by having Frida and Diego literally enter into the world of her paintings. Sometimes it works; sometimes it serves merely as a fancy distraction. Still, Taymor at least deserves credit for boldness in such scenes.
All in all, `Frida' provides a fascinating portrait of its heroine - and one of the best performances of the year to go along with it.
A near miss
gws-215 January 2004
"Frida" is saved from mediocrity by the wonderful performances of Selma Hayek and Alfred Molina, and by its imaginative cinematography. Unfortunately, the underlying story of the love affair between the title character, Frida Kahlo, and her husband, Diego Rivera, tells an unpleasant tale of irresponsibility and betrayal. Nevertheless, Kahlo's art is cleverly used to tell her story and Hayek's and Molina's terrific performances manage to invest Kahlo and Rivera with an attractiveness I suspect they lacked in real life. This is a good although not a great film; recommended, 7 out of 10.
art, communism and sex
damienmuldoon12 April 2007
I watched this film for the first time, last night,and, it is one of the most beautiful films I have ever seen. There are shades of "Surviving Picasso" about it. Yet, this movie transcends the Picasso film on a number of levels. Where "Surviving Picasso" is all about Anthony Hopkins masterful performance, "Frida" has a chemistry between its leading actors that you just don't see enough of in modern cinema. Yes, Salma Hayek inhabits the character of Frida and makes it entirely her own. But Alfred Molina's portrayal of her overweight, philandering husband really brings this movie to life. History is important to this movie also. Although removed from the turbulent events dominating European politics in the 1930s, Mexico embraces the ideology that will soon tear Europe apart and reflects that ideology in its art. Diego Rivera, as portrayed by Molina, is certainly a greater lover of women and painting than he is of political ideology, but the fact that he plays host to the exiled Trotsky shows that he is willing to put himself in harms way for the sake of his political principles. Trotsky is played charmingly by Geoffery Rush and his introduction to the story sends Diego and Frida's marriage to another level. This movie never fails to surprise you and if you have not seen it yet, you should.
never felt the love
SnoopyStyle28 November 2015
It's 1922 Mexico City. Frida Kahlo (Salma Hayek) is a rebellious student who is intrigued with artist Diego Rivera (Alfred Molina). She is severely injured in a trolley accident and left bedridden with lifelong pains. She regains her ability to walk. Diego takes an interest in Frida's work. They get married and begin a passionate complicated relationship. She befriends his jealous ex Lupe Marín. He constantly cheats on her. Their son dies in childbirth. She starts having affairs with both men and women including communist icon Leon Trotsky.
I really love the first hour. Her accident, her recovery and their courtship are all very compelling. Then the second half kind of move on and on and on. The problem is that he's such a slut. He never really demonstrates his love for her. I guess there is dependence or codependence. It's not that appealing. He's horrible and it doesn't put her in a great light either. It needs to illuminate her or her art more than what the movie gives.
I really love the first hour. Her accident, her recovery and their courtship are all very compelling. Then the second half kind of move on and on and on. The problem is that he's such a slut. He never really demonstrates his love for her. I guess there is dependence or codependence. It's not that appealing. He's horrible and it doesn't put her in a great light either. It needs to illuminate her or her art more than what the movie gives.
Salma Hayek RULES
Rogue-329 November 2002
This is a very well-realized film, and the most inspired thing about it is the casting of Salma Hayek in the title role.
After displaying amazing star quality in Desperado, Hayek has been sadly under-used by the film world - until this magnificent and passionate performance, which will surely get her an Oscar nomination if there's any hope for Hollywood at all. Proving herself capable of enormous range and blazingly intense depth, Hayek's Frida is a genuine flesh-and-blood individual who refuses to live life on the sidelines (as women were 'supposed' to do in those days). She was an artist in every sense of the word - taking and owning all that life gave her and transforming it into unflinching portraits of her soul. Supremely inspiring and deeply felt.
After displaying amazing star quality in Desperado, Hayek has been sadly under-used by the film world - until this magnificent and passionate performance, which will surely get her an Oscar nomination if there's any hope for Hollywood at all. Proving herself capable of enormous range and blazingly intense depth, Hayek's Frida is a genuine flesh-and-blood individual who refuses to live life on the sidelines (as women were 'supposed' to do in those days). She was an artist in every sense of the word - taking and owning all that life gave her and transforming it into unflinching portraits of her soul. Supremely inspiring and deeply felt.
Good in technical aspects, that's all
jackasstrange2 December 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Biopics aren't and will never be my piece of cake. Sure, The Pianist is one of my favorite films, i also liked a bit Schindler's List. Rare exceptions. But this one is just like 90% of the bios produced: tedious and uninteresting. Sure she was perhaps a woman with will to life, she had his physical obstacles and tried to win them and stuff, but there is really nothing more in the film.
Talking about the plot, i have major problems with the fact that it has little to none focus for the secondary characters, which clearly would be interesting aces if earned a fair amount of screen time to them. The focus always being on Frida really don't helped this film, since that she was either drinking and yelling like crazy or just painting. And that is also my point:The story has no conflicts besides the traditional husband- wive discussion.
The relationship of Frida with Trotski is either pointless or bad explored, because it just added useless running time to film. Also, some supposed jokes aren't funny or what's ever. This film tried to expand other limits beyond the melodrama and it clearly failed. But OK, i kinda liked to see the special cameos of Antonio Banderas and Edward Norton, which instantly took this film out of the stagnation and for once brought my interest in it.
The cinematography is very nice, the art direction is terrific and got some inspirations from the Spanish paintings and their use of vivid colors in the characters, to contrast with a more neutral ambient. The music used in the film is bad, definitely not a fan. The editing was OK, it wouldn't help that much in this film anyways unless if they had cut lots of pointless scenes from it.
The acting by Salma Hayek was indeed good, not impressive, but she did her job fine. She really put effort in her interpretation work of Frida. Deserved Oscar nomination.
I wouldn't recommend it. A search in Wikipedia is definitely faster and more interesting.6.2/10
Talking about the plot, i have major problems with the fact that it has little to none focus for the secondary characters, which clearly would be interesting aces if earned a fair amount of screen time to them. The focus always being on Frida really don't helped this film, since that she was either drinking and yelling like crazy or just painting. And that is also my point:The story has no conflicts besides the traditional husband- wive discussion.
The relationship of Frida with Trotski is either pointless or bad explored, because it just added useless running time to film. Also, some supposed jokes aren't funny or what's ever. This film tried to expand other limits beyond the melodrama and it clearly failed. But OK, i kinda liked to see the special cameos of Antonio Banderas and Edward Norton, which instantly took this film out of the stagnation and for once brought my interest in it.
The cinematography is very nice, the art direction is terrific and got some inspirations from the Spanish paintings and their use of vivid colors in the characters, to contrast with a more neutral ambient. The music used in the film is bad, definitely not a fan. The editing was OK, it wouldn't help that much in this film anyways unless if they had cut lots of pointless scenes from it.
The acting by Salma Hayek was indeed good, not impressive, but she did her job fine. She really put effort in her interpretation work of Frida. Deserved Oscar nomination.
I wouldn't recommend it. A search in Wikipedia is definitely faster and more interesting.6.2/10
¡Viva Frida!
EmperorNortonII26 November 2002
"Frida" is a beautifully done biopic about Mexican artist and icon Frida Kahlo. Salma Hayek plays this role very well. She exhibits all the passion that goes into being an artist, especially when playing off Alfred Molina, who plays Diego Rivera, husband of Frida Kahlo, and a famous Mexican artist in his own right. What really impressed me was the artistic references in the movie. I loved seeing the paintings coming to life! I also liked the surreal animated sequences, particularly the hospital nightmare, populated with Day of the Dead-style skeletons. Few movies have ever made me regard them as a work of art. "Frida" is definitely one of them!
The titular character deserved much better
bregund13 February 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Frida's life was a soap opera, and seemingly tailor-made for a film, but the tiny budget and mediocre performances don't do justice for such a brilliant artist. The lethargic pacing and frustrating sense of unexplored avenues gives the viewer the sense of an unfinished film. Salma Hayek is suitable in the main role, but she lacks the finesse and stage presence to portray such an iconic figure. Alfred Molina, normally a brilliant, chameleonic actor who vanishes into whatever role he plays, seems strangely inert. Even Geoffrey Rush as Trotsky isn't that great.
This claustrophobic film is mostly confined to the interiors of houses or studios, except for a hike up an Aztek pyramid and the famous bus accident that gave Frida lifelong pain. Even the trip to New York is a cheap, unsatisfying pastiche of flat graphics that any high school film studio could put together. One gets the impression that if they threw twenty million more at this film, it would have been as visually stunning as the artist's paintings themselves, which by the way aren't featured as prominently as you might expect.
I guess I was expecting the film equivalent of Frida's magical surrealism, but what came across instead was a paint-by-numbers drama force-fitting famous lines everyone knows, such as the mother's lament that Frida's marriage to Diego was like a dove marrying an elephant.
This claustrophobic film is mostly confined to the interiors of houses or studios, except for a hike up an Aztek pyramid and the famous bus accident that gave Frida lifelong pain. Even the trip to New York is a cheap, unsatisfying pastiche of flat graphics that any high school film studio could put together. One gets the impression that if they threw twenty million more at this film, it would have been as visually stunning as the artist's paintings themselves, which by the way aren't featured as prominently as you might expect.
I guess I was expecting the film equivalent of Frida's magical surrealism, but what came across instead was a paint-by-numbers drama force-fitting famous lines everyone knows, such as the mother's lament that Frida's marriage to Diego was like a dove marrying an elephant.
Salma hayek nailed this!
adoma-yousef22 August 2020
I don't think anyone will ever be able to do this role better than Salma Hayek, she did it perfectly.
The movie was very good, the sound track and the cinematography were amazing.
Everything was right in place,amazing!
Uninspired and by the numbers
=G=11 June 2003
The biopic "Frida" leapfrogs through the highs and lows of the life of Mexican artist Frida Kahlo with a soap opera quality performance by Hayek, an uninspired screenplay and cinematography by rote, and an obvious lack of the passion which fueled the artist. For those unfamiliar with the title character, the subject will likely prove to be only marginally interesting. For those familiar with Kahlo, "Frida" will be a must see. Keep expectations low and you may be pleasantly surprised. (B-)
Cliché-ridden source of two hours mild pleasure
dane-7017 December 2009
Now I know that Frida Kahlo had an accident, was involved with Diego Rivera and Trotski, and had strange eyebrows. I also know that Selma Hayak is a babe, and I know a lot about her breasts. Among the things I don't know: what Kahlo's relation to women was; how she learned to paint; what painters she admired; what her relation to the 'revolution' was; what the relation was between suffering and art. I am left to imagine how this absolutely perfect body on which the camera dotes so obsessively could possibly contain the pain it is supposed to harbor (every forty minutes or so the director reminds us of this). But then, I get a really cool lesbian-dancing scene, which I suppose was more important than any of this trivial stuff. And did I mention the boobs?
Outstanding!
smoothhoney12654 April 2005
Usually, when you see a biopic about a famous artist and genius you either get to see a tragic, suffering creature or an idealized God. And often it's always the same: He/she was born, had a difficult childhood, created some masterpieces, had some affairs (usually with actors/actresses or/and musicians) and dies a sad and lonely death. But what a refreshing difference "Frida" was! Frida Kahlo's life was more suffering than joy, yet the movie does not pity her all the time but shows Frida's lust for life, love, art and her husband Diegor Riviera.
It tells the story of a really unusual life: When Frida is a student, young, beautiful, full of live and in love with a gorgeous boy (Diego Luna from "Y tu mama tambien" and "Dirty Dancing Havanna Nights) she experiences a horrible accident when her bus crashes with a tram. Frida then becomes a cripple for the rest of her life, but through this she experiences herself in a new way and starts to paint, mostly self-portraits where she deals with her pain, her family, political situations and people she loves. Soon after the accident a miracle happens: Frida learns to walk again and the first thing she does is to visit the famous artist and painter Diego Rivera to ask his opinion about her paintings the beginning of an unusual and often complicated love story that should last a lifetime.
We get to learn a woman who experiences so many tragic things in life that it should be enough to commit suicide, yet she never gives up, grows stronger and one thing that certainly helps her through hard times is her wit, her dignity and her love for life and art. She takes what she wants and needs (which also includes love affairs with men and women) but has also a lot to give. Plus her works, so honest, brutal but also beautiful in their truth, reveal one of the greatest talents of our time.
A whole lot of this movie works of course through its female protagonist, whose role is not that easy and a real challenge sometimes. The wonderful and graceful Salma Hayek, who is immensely gifted, does really great work here and awakes Frida and her world to life again. Hayek perfectly holds the balance between triumphs and losses, joy and sorrow, madness and daily routine, life and death. She is just a pleasure to watch, she doesn't play Frida, she IS Frida. Another important character is of course Diego Rivera, the greatest love of Frida's life. Alfred Molina, a great British actor, is perfectly casted for this role and besides, has a remarkable resemblance to the real Diego. Outstanding performances also by the supporting cast: Valeria Golino, Ashley Judd (with a great imitation of the Mexican accent), Geoffrey Rush and Edward Norton.
Frida a feast for the senses full of life and exploding emotions and a tribute to a truly unique and remarkable woman, who was the greatest female artist of the last century!
It tells the story of a really unusual life: When Frida is a student, young, beautiful, full of live and in love with a gorgeous boy (Diego Luna from "Y tu mama tambien" and "Dirty Dancing Havanna Nights) she experiences a horrible accident when her bus crashes with a tram. Frida then becomes a cripple for the rest of her life, but through this she experiences herself in a new way and starts to paint, mostly self-portraits where she deals with her pain, her family, political situations and people she loves. Soon after the accident a miracle happens: Frida learns to walk again and the first thing she does is to visit the famous artist and painter Diego Rivera to ask his opinion about her paintings the beginning of an unusual and often complicated love story that should last a lifetime.
We get to learn a woman who experiences so many tragic things in life that it should be enough to commit suicide, yet she never gives up, grows stronger and one thing that certainly helps her through hard times is her wit, her dignity and her love for life and art. She takes what she wants and needs (which also includes love affairs with men and women) but has also a lot to give. Plus her works, so honest, brutal but also beautiful in their truth, reveal one of the greatest talents of our time.
A whole lot of this movie works of course through its female protagonist, whose role is not that easy and a real challenge sometimes. The wonderful and graceful Salma Hayek, who is immensely gifted, does really great work here and awakes Frida and her world to life again. Hayek perfectly holds the balance between triumphs and losses, joy and sorrow, madness and daily routine, life and death. She is just a pleasure to watch, she doesn't play Frida, she IS Frida. Another important character is of course Diego Rivera, the greatest love of Frida's life. Alfred Molina, a great British actor, is perfectly casted for this role and besides, has a remarkable resemblance to the real Diego. Outstanding performances also by the supporting cast: Valeria Golino, Ashley Judd (with a great imitation of the Mexican accent), Geoffrey Rush and Edward Norton.
Frida a feast for the senses full of life and exploding emotions and a tribute to a truly unique and remarkable woman, who was the greatest female artist of the last century!
Paint By Numbers Biopic
evanston_dad4 August 2010
I generally find biopics fairly boring, and "Frida" is no exception. Their makers always seem to think that an examination of the person will illuminate the art they produced, and they almost never do. Maybe because art comes from such a deep, personal place in each individual that a filmmaker can't get at the source.
Salma Hayek is fine as Frida Kahlo, but it takes more than an artfully applied mono-brow to add up to a compelling performance. Alfred Molina does fine in the acting department, but honestly, Molina is so physically repellent in this movie that I found it difficult to tolerate him.
Stage director Julie Taymor showed an uncharacteristic amount of restraint in bringing this story to the screen.
Grade: B-
Salma Hayek is fine as Frida Kahlo, but it takes more than an artfully applied mono-brow to add up to a compelling performance. Alfred Molina does fine in the acting department, but honestly, Molina is so physically repellent in this movie that I found it difficult to tolerate him.
Stage director Julie Taymor showed an uncharacteristic amount of restraint in bringing this story to the screen.
Grade: B-
Should've had an Oscar nomination for best picture
lapintiira7 May 2018
What an incredibly beautiful and original film, which highlights Frida's life in a poignant yet fierce manner. The story never strays from her peculiar prospective nor her intense feelings, and it really translates well onto screen. I saw this film after the allegations against Harvey Weinstein came out, where we learned the price Salma Hayek and Julie Taymor had to pay for wanting to produce and direct a female led film in the early 2000's. To them I want to say thank you for your courage, being strong and paving the way for future female artists and filmmakers. Your film is beautiful and women deserve better #metoo
Beautiful aesthetics, reste weaker
antoinebachmann5 May 2003
Visually stunning movie, with a huge effort made to do justice in film for to the works of Frida K. However the rest, the story, the pace, was weaker. All of this seems logical given the director's background. Overall the film is well worth seeing but it is better to know what to expect. Antoine
The Story of a Great Mexican Artist, With a Stunning Performance of Salma Hayek
claudio_carvalho24 February 2004
Frida Kahlo (Salma Hayek) is an tempestuous teenager, when she suffers a bus accident in Mexico. Her column and leg have multiples fractures and she is impaled by a metal bar. Her father and mother spend all the money they have in surgeries and treatments, and in the end, also due to her will and strength, she walks again. Frida shows her paintings to the famous painter, intellectual and communist Diego Rivera (Alfred Molina) to criticize them. He finds them excellent and they become friend, lovers and get married to each other. Diego is very unfaithful to her and has many night stands with his models, but when he has an affair with Frida's sister Cristina, their marriage ends and they divorce. In the 30's, Leon Trotsky (Geoffrey Rush) gets political asylum in Mexico and is lodged with his wife in the house of Frida's parents. Frida and Trotsky have an affair, when Trotsky's wife ask him to move to another place. Rivera moves to USA and Frida has a gangrene in her toes. They are amputated and Frida gets worse and worse, using pain killers, steel jackets and other treatment. But she starts painting maybe her best pictures. Rivera comes back to Frida and gets married with her for the second time, and stays with her until her death. The story of this Mexican artist is wonderfully presented in this movie, with a stunning performance of Salma Hayek. Frida is showed as a great artist, revolutionary human being, having a great sexuality, feeling pain due to her accident, but having a great pleasure in life. All the cast and the direction are excellent. The theme song (`Burn It Blue'), from the Brazilian Caetano Veloso, is wonderful and won the Oscar. The make-up also won an Oscar. An excellent entertainment indicated for any audience. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): `Frida'
Title (Brazil): `Frida'
Why do they speak English
stensson26 December 2002
It's difficult to understand this contempt for English-spoken audiences. Is it supposed that they are unable to read subtitles? Everybody speaks English with a hispanic accent here, even in Mexican workers' bars.
Salma Hayek is a talented actress, but this is not her best part. There are to little complications here, which is much due to the script. Frida is mostly the living loving soft-hearted girl, who gets into two accidents or as she puts it out: the tram and the husband. We don't get to understand much of her art, although many paintings are shown. What was Frida trying to say? She has a miscarriage and paints that for example, but what does all the symbols in her paintings mean?
Alfred Molina is all right as her always cheating husband. Edward Norton rather lousy as the young Rockefeller. Antonio Banderas is seen in a smaller part. This picture might be regarded as an intellectual mainstream film, but it is definitely more mainstream than intellectual. And please, speak Spanish while in Mexico!
Salma Hayek is a talented actress, but this is not her best part. There are to little complications here, which is much due to the script. Frida is mostly the living loving soft-hearted girl, who gets into two accidents or as she puts it out: the tram and the husband. We don't get to understand much of her art, although many paintings are shown. What was Frida trying to say? She has a miscarriage and paints that for example, but what does all the symbols in her paintings mean?
Alfred Molina is all right as her always cheating husband. Edward Norton rather lousy as the young Rockefeller. Antonio Banderas is seen in a smaller part. This picture might be regarded as an intellectual mainstream film, but it is definitely more mainstream than intellectual. And please, speak Spanish while in Mexico!
Salma deserved the Oscar
libertyandunion-792-72052025 August 2020
Regardless of how great Kidman was in "The Hours," Salma Hayek deserved Best Actress for this role of a lifetime. This is a strong movie. More of a focus on her painting would've been desirable, but it's a great story, and Salma was perfect.
shallow portrayal of an artist during revolutionary times
amigoPaulo27 December 2002
`Frida' is a shallow and almost mono-chrome rendition of an extraordinary colorful person living in revolutionary times. Unfortunately, the film is focused on the personal tribulations of Frida and the serial infidelities of her husband, Diego Rivera. Both artists aren't placed within the exciting cultural revolution that engulfed Mexico pre-WWII. Great artists don't appear in a vacuum, but depend on a nurturing culture; this film doesn't even attempt to mention such context.
The film goes from one personal drama involving Diego to another. The focus is their relationship and Frida's personal tragedy involving her disabilities. Both artists are short changed - giants in real life boxed into a small frame. However, a redeeming feature of the film is the stellar acting of the Frida & Diego roles. With such a cast and great theme, so much more could have been achieved by throwing in some more historical or cultural context. It is also a shame that the film was produced in English; why can't an audience be assumed to be mature or literate enough to read a few subtitles? Mexicans may rightly barf at the portrayal of their artists and this particular slice of history.
One is also struck at the liberties the script took in portraying Frida's life. Frida having an affair with Trotsky? Where did they get this irrelevant snippet? Oh yes, Frida may have had some homosexual escapades. The film makes a big deal of this.
The film goes from one personal drama involving Diego to another. The focus is their relationship and Frida's personal tragedy involving her disabilities. Both artists are short changed - giants in real life boxed into a small frame. However, a redeeming feature of the film is the stellar acting of the Frida & Diego roles. With such a cast and great theme, so much more could have been achieved by throwing in some more historical or cultural context. It is also a shame that the film was produced in English; why can't an audience be assumed to be mature or literate enough to read a few subtitles? Mexicans may rightly barf at the portrayal of their artists and this particular slice of history.
One is also struck at the liberties the script took in portraying Frida's life. Frida having an affair with Trotsky? Where did they get this irrelevant snippet? Oh yes, Frida may have had some homosexual escapades. The film makes a big deal of this.
Salma Hayek shines as Frida
elliedori2 August 2020
Feels like a patch work of bitter compromises
graycat-112 June 2003
Clearly, many talented people lavished much effort on this production. Sadly, it never really engaged my emotions, and when it ended, I shrugged and felt vaguely disappointed. Frida feels like a patch work of bitter compromises, polished to a high gloss. It would have required a transcendent performance by Salma Hayek to lift it above the merely conventional, but she never really brings Frida Kahlo back to life, which, ironically, seems to have been Frida's wish.
Salmas Khalo trademark for Disney
a_mon_lem7 March 2011
Salma Khalo's movie grabs many references from the other movie about, Frida: Naturaleza Viva (1984, not 1986), but not the important thing about her shows in the movie, in fact, deliberately (i don't know who had this brilliant idea) twist all the controversial faces of Frida and the contribution to Socialist movement, the support to Sandinist Armed uprising in Nicaragua , instead Salmas wants count us a tale with aspartame; to American market a friendly face of the real anti-capitalist Frida Khalo.
just nothing more to say about this film, it worths watch it only for the BSO, edition, scenarios, the Frida Khalos masterworks of course, (but not for biographical references, please, take a book and read it) and cinematography, but the content, is like a big pan cake filled with...air
just nothing more to say about this film, it worths watch it only for the BSO, edition, scenarios, the Frida Khalos masterworks of course, (but not for biographical references, please, take a book and read it) and cinematography, but the content, is like a big pan cake filled with...air
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
