765 reviews
We are such a fragile race, so affected by the shifts of a societal breeze. A child misinterprets what she sees and brings about the destruction of people she actually loves. So caught up in her dramatic wants and angry, she lies, and that lie haunts her for her remaining days. This is a movie version of a wonderful book, the best I read that year. It captures the pain and the need to make true restitution. The truth of the matter is that sometimes it just doesn't work that way. The characters come to realize that. It's a slice of life in wartime and all the chickens come home to roost. Probably the most gut wrenching thing is that the character that causes the most damage has great success in life, but carries around her guilt to her dying day. She is never allowed to truly enjoy things. This is a really fine movie and, except for some breaks in editing, does a nice job of presenting the issues in the novel.
Comprising recognisable, realistic and outstandingly beautiful performances, set within an uncomfortably believable and heartbreakingly tragic story, it will leave a mark, a scar, a wound on your soul; especially if you have an ounce of humanity, understanding and empathy for the circumstances within which it is told.
- JamesHitchcock
- Sep 20, 2007
- Permalink
I usually don't like watching novels turned into movies (specially when I liked the novel as much as I liked McEwan's "Atonement") but this was a really pleasant surprise. The plot is extraordinarily well adapted, leaving out what cannot possibly be included in a two-hour film, changing very few details to translate literary language to cinematographic language but sticking to the essence and the spirit of the novel.
I really believe that if you enjoyed McEwan's novel, you will fall for this beautiful film. If you have never read McEwan, you will fall for the intriguing and thrilling story written by this wonderful English novelist.
Please, don't miss this one!
I really believe that if you enjoyed McEwan's novel, you will fall for this beautiful film. If you have never read McEwan, you will fall for the intriguing and thrilling story written by this wonderful English novelist.
Please, don't miss this one!
- PizzicatoFishCrouch
- Aug 25, 2007
- Permalink
I saw a preview of this film yesterday and felt privileged to be one of the first people to see the film. It was also a pleasure to see a film before reading any other critical review or opinion. I am a great fan of Ian Mcewan and was concerned that it would not be possible to capture the subtleties and nuances of Mcewan's writing but I needn't have had any worries. The director, Joe Wright and screenplay writer Christopher Hampton have done a superb job and the complexities of the novel are superbly captured with real imagination. The story is set in three main areas, an English country house in 1935, war torn France 1940 and London 1940. The atmosphere in of all three are wonderfully captured by the director, cinematographer, costume design and score and I am sure that there are going to be some Oscar nominations for these. James McAvoy as lead man gives a tremendous performance of a restrained but passionate man. I was not as convinced by Keira Knightley's performance and am not sure that her acting has the mature edge to capture the social nuances of the times that McAvoy did so successfully. Do not see this film if you like fast paced films and rapid plot development! This is not a film for the pop video generation. If however you like character development and a plot that unravels at a pace that allows you to be immersed in the atmosphere of the film then I can highly recommend Atonement as one of the best films that I have seen this year.
- chelseachelsea
- Aug 19, 2007
- Permalink
My wife and I went to see the movie last night and were totally blown away by the whole experience. So brilliantly directed and acted. The movie time just flew by and we were drawn in and captivated by each dramatic moment. Never having read the book or been an expert on WW2, I had a truly open mind on what to expect and I'm not one of those who count every rivet or go looking for technical inaccuracies however small. This was truly a masterpiece of cinematography. We were treated to wonderful performances, lavish sets, shocking and thought-provoking moments and haunting themes. I had the privilege of being an extra in the Redcar, Dunkirk scene and once seen in its full glory and effect on the big screen I was simply in awe and glad to have been a part of it. Walking along Redcar beach from now on will never quite be the same again. I am quite sure that the movie will win a number of awards within the next 12 months, but that is not what really matters. Movies are there to entertain, tell a story and affect you emotionally and by God this did it in spades! If you have not seen it yet, you must!
- jayceetees
- Sep 15, 2007
- Permalink
- evanston_dad
- Dec 16, 2007
- Permalink
I deeply appreciate Atonement for other reasons and while the films are about 10 years apart I am utterly perplexed by how Nolan's Dunkirk became the critical darling it is, especially since this film exists. This film isn't about the evacuation of Dunkirk or WWII (those elements form the background for a fully realized troubled romance and family drama) and YET this film spends about 20 minutes on Dunkirk and it conveys the horror, defeat and dread of it it far sharper and more resonant than Nolan's film does for its entire run time. There is a one very long shot of soldiers on the beach that even manages to capture the whole what is time when facing your death thing better than Nolan's film.
With that being said I most appreciate the soft, luminous cinematography and the very atypical score in this film. Indeed atypical flourishes-the split perspective, the inserted fiction within the narrative, what's being atoned for etc.-greatly elevate a sweeping romance that might have been too conventional if the film played it straight up. It is really the details-sometimes as small as word choice-that really make this film a ravishing epic.
Doomed romances rest on their casting and I can say that both Knightley and McAvoy don't disappoint. McAvoy especially is really sexy, beautiful and emotional in this in that perfectly restrained British way. It may be his career best performance. Good film. It is much better than No Country for Old Men.
With that being said I most appreciate the soft, luminous cinematography and the very atypical score in this film. Indeed atypical flourishes-the split perspective, the inserted fiction within the narrative, what's being atoned for etc.-greatly elevate a sweeping romance that might have been too conventional if the film played it straight up. It is really the details-sometimes as small as word choice-that really make this film a ravishing epic.
Doomed romances rest on their casting and I can say that both Knightley and McAvoy don't disappoint. McAvoy especially is really sexy, beautiful and emotional in this in that perfectly restrained British way. It may be his career best performance. Good film. It is much better than No Country for Old Men.
- CubsandCulture
- Feb 8, 2020
- Permalink
- classicsoncall
- Apr 8, 2018
- Permalink
In 1930s England, Robbie is the son of a cleaning woman who has fallen in love with his mother's master's daughter (his childhood friend). On the same night where they reveal their love to each other, Robbie is accused by the woman's younger sister of a rape he didn't commit. Robbie is sent to jail and off to fight World War II... and for the remainder of the film, the two lovers try to reunite while the younger sister comes to term with the horrible mistake she made that tore her family apart.
Let me be honest up front: I had a very minimal interest in this film. I was mildly interested by its Oscar aspirations (7 nominations) and then I was slightly more interested when my friend Chelsea expressed interest (with whom I ended up seeing it). A chick flick starring Keira Knightley (who, to me, is a younger, classier Winona Ryder)? Not my first choice. Although, I went to go see "I Know Who Killed Me", so my instincts aren't always he greatest. Anyway, point being -- I saw this film half-heartedly and really liked it.
The beginning is really strong and interesting, and surprisingly funny. The involvement of a certain curse word (one of the more notorious ones) plays a big part and was funny in a somewhat awkward way. After the opening, the tone of the film turned decidedly darker... which you'd expect with a film about war and rape, I guess. Emotionally the film runs strong all the way through, working with loneliness and casualties of war (there's a scene later on with a dying French soldier that doesn't shy from showing the realities of war).
Worth singling out is a very long continuous shot (maybe 8 or 9 minutes) of English troops on the shores of France. We see troops singing, troops destroying jeeps, troops shooting horses and much more... to get this all in one shot is a major feat. The last long shot I recall is in "Children of Men", which ran about maybe 6 minutes but with much less going on to coordinate. The choreographer (or whoever) deserved the Oscar if anyone did, although in the end it only won a single award -- for best original soundtrack (which I don't recall as being a particularly stand-out score).
I think the film closed rather weakly after all the quality emotion (I can't really explain more without revealing things). But it's still a good film, only maybe losing a point from this closing. If you're a fan of period pieces or tough romance stories (this is no romantic comedy) this is for you. I don't know if I could watch it again -- it's good enough but a bit emotional. But I'm glad I saw it at least once and you should see it too.
Let me be honest up front: I had a very minimal interest in this film. I was mildly interested by its Oscar aspirations (7 nominations) and then I was slightly more interested when my friend Chelsea expressed interest (with whom I ended up seeing it). A chick flick starring Keira Knightley (who, to me, is a younger, classier Winona Ryder)? Not my first choice. Although, I went to go see "I Know Who Killed Me", so my instincts aren't always he greatest. Anyway, point being -- I saw this film half-heartedly and really liked it.
The beginning is really strong and interesting, and surprisingly funny. The involvement of a certain curse word (one of the more notorious ones) plays a big part and was funny in a somewhat awkward way. After the opening, the tone of the film turned decidedly darker... which you'd expect with a film about war and rape, I guess. Emotionally the film runs strong all the way through, working with loneliness and casualties of war (there's a scene later on with a dying French soldier that doesn't shy from showing the realities of war).
Worth singling out is a very long continuous shot (maybe 8 or 9 minutes) of English troops on the shores of France. We see troops singing, troops destroying jeeps, troops shooting horses and much more... to get this all in one shot is a major feat. The last long shot I recall is in "Children of Men", which ran about maybe 6 minutes but with much less going on to coordinate. The choreographer (or whoever) deserved the Oscar if anyone did, although in the end it only won a single award -- for best original soundtrack (which I don't recall as being a particularly stand-out score).
I think the film closed rather weakly after all the quality emotion (I can't really explain more without revealing things). But it's still a good film, only maybe losing a point from this closing. If you're a fan of period pieces or tough romance stories (this is no romantic comedy) this is for you. I don't know if I could watch it again -- it's good enough but a bit emotional. But I'm glad I saw it at least once and you should see it too.
Its very rare that a movie like Atonement comes along and leaves me completely speechless and in complete and utter awe for hours after I have seen it. You see Atonement isn't just the best movie I have seen all year, its one of the best movies I have seen in a very, very long time. And by that I include Pan's Labyrinth, yes this movie is better than my favourite movie of 2006, and I never imagined Atonement would ever come close to that level of greatness until fifteen minutes into the movie last night. Atonement is an unusual movie, in fact its fair to say that I have never seen anything quite like it. Its a rare movie that actually I adored so much that I am going to hunt down a copy of the book tomorrow just to see the comparisons. Its not an easy movie I'll be honest, if you go in expecting something light hearted and easy to digest then you will leave the cinema feeling very cheated. This is a movie that deals with very dark things at times. No matter how much I desire to write in depth about every aspect of the movie I just can't, the movies greatest triumph is the fact that its plot is so intricately woven that if you ruin one part of the storyline to anyone then the movies impact is slightly lessened. The storyline is just brilliant, but its the climax that leaves you in store for the biggest shocker, and its this shocker that leaves you reeling long after you have left the cinema. The performances here are all spectacular, I think its fair to say that the two leads, James McAvoy and Keira Knightly shall be receiving at the very least nominations for Best Actor/Best Actress. The score is beautiful, whoever came up with the idea of using a typewriter as a musical instrument deserves to be praised heavily. Its rare a score leaves me feeling moved, the score in this movie did that for me. That's yet another Oscar that this movie deserves to win. All in all Atonement is just perfection, I doubt you'll find a better movie this year or even for the next three years. In a time when Blockbusters get all the attention it is nice to see a small, but intelligent movie leave me in awe.
As I previously mentioned the performances in this movie is simply amazing. Keira Knightly is an odd actress, while she proved herself in Pride and Prejudice, yes I have unfortunately seen that movie, she comes across as a wooden actress in films like Pirates of the Caribbean. Atonement really sees her at her best yet. Her character is different from what we've seen Knightly play before. Usually she goes for the spunky females, this time she seems more like a proper lady, albeit one that smokes constantly and is a bit stuck up for her own good. Keira Knightly excels in the earlier, more laid back sequences, but its in the later stuff, the more powerful stuff that we see just how talented an actress she truly is. Despite all my praise for Knightly she still plays second fiddle to James McAvoy. The former actor of Shameless and Narnia is on a roll lately. His excellent, although sadly overlooked performance in The Last King of Scotland still sticks firmly in memory. But his performance here is simple breathtaking. One sequence in particular where we see his acting talent come to light has to be the sequence in Dunkirk (more on that later), no words but the performance says everything. Knightly might not be certain to win an Oscar, but McAvoy surely is! Its also refreshing to see a young actress, Saoirse Ronan, not be eye gougingly irritating, but rather a superb actress. Her character, Briony, is a vital character in the movie, and for such a young actress she delivers her performance so chillingly brilliant. Unfortunately next to this brilliant performance, Romola Garai who plays an older Briony pales in comparison. Her performance is still brilliant, but not as effective nor as memorable as the younger actress.
The storyline of Atonement is where the film holds most of its impact. Essentialy the film is about a lie that Briony tells, and how it affects the lives of her, Cecilia, and most importantly of all, Robbie. That's pretty much all I can and will say of the storyline. A lot more happens over the course of the movie, and a lot of stuff that you think will happen doesn't, and things you think won't happen will. The ending is a prime example of this and to be honest I didn't see it coming. The way the movie is directed is also something note. The beautiful colours of the summer house are amazing, but the way the camera moves around the house makes it even better. But the direction will be remembered for one scene in this movie, and its in Dunkirk. I mentioned this previously for the performance in that scene, what I failed to mention is that the shot is a continuous shot that lasts five minutes as we see the chaos of Dunkirk. From horses being shot to a man hanging from a ferris wheel, the sequence is shown in all its glory. It really is a powerful moment, and probably the one scene that got me closest to tears, purely because of the singing in the background, it is shocking just how amazing this sequence truly is.
Overall Atonement is a perfect movie, in actual fact its a movie with pretty much no flaws whatsoever. Superb performances, beautiful direction, a script and storyline to die for. It is unlikely any film will top this for a very long time, this is something that will go down in cinema history as being a classic, and it highly deserves it inevitable status.
As I previously mentioned the performances in this movie is simply amazing. Keira Knightly is an odd actress, while she proved herself in Pride and Prejudice, yes I have unfortunately seen that movie, she comes across as a wooden actress in films like Pirates of the Caribbean. Atonement really sees her at her best yet. Her character is different from what we've seen Knightly play before. Usually she goes for the spunky females, this time she seems more like a proper lady, albeit one that smokes constantly and is a bit stuck up for her own good. Keira Knightly excels in the earlier, more laid back sequences, but its in the later stuff, the more powerful stuff that we see just how talented an actress she truly is. Despite all my praise for Knightly she still plays second fiddle to James McAvoy. The former actor of Shameless and Narnia is on a roll lately. His excellent, although sadly overlooked performance in The Last King of Scotland still sticks firmly in memory. But his performance here is simple breathtaking. One sequence in particular where we see his acting talent come to light has to be the sequence in Dunkirk (more on that later), no words but the performance says everything. Knightly might not be certain to win an Oscar, but McAvoy surely is! Its also refreshing to see a young actress, Saoirse Ronan, not be eye gougingly irritating, but rather a superb actress. Her character, Briony, is a vital character in the movie, and for such a young actress she delivers her performance so chillingly brilliant. Unfortunately next to this brilliant performance, Romola Garai who plays an older Briony pales in comparison. Her performance is still brilliant, but not as effective nor as memorable as the younger actress.
The storyline of Atonement is where the film holds most of its impact. Essentialy the film is about a lie that Briony tells, and how it affects the lives of her, Cecilia, and most importantly of all, Robbie. That's pretty much all I can and will say of the storyline. A lot more happens over the course of the movie, and a lot of stuff that you think will happen doesn't, and things you think won't happen will. The ending is a prime example of this and to be honest I didn't see it coming. The way the movie is directed is also something note. The beautiful colours of the summer house are amazing, but the way the camera moves around the house makes it even better. But the direction will be remembered for one scene in this movie, and its in Dunkirk. I mentioned this previously for the performance in that scene, what I failed to mention is that the shot is a continuous shot that lasts five minutes as we see the chaos of Dunkirk. From horses being shot to a man hanging from a ferris wheel, the sequence is shown in all its glory. It really is a powerful moment, and probably the one scene that got me closest to tears, purely because of the singing in the background, it is shocking just how amazing this sequence truly is.
Overall Atonement is a perfect movie, in actual fact its a movie with pretty much no flaws whatsoever. Superb performances, beautiful direction, a script and storyline to die for. It is unlikely any film will top this for a very long time, this is something that will go down in cinema history as being a classic, and it highly deserves it inevitable status.
- simonparker1990
- Sep 9, 2007
- Permalink
I was completely stunned when I watched Atonement yesterday. From the funny lines to the sad moments, this movie does not fail to amaze me. James McAvoy is by far the shining star in this movie, endowed with unfailing charisma and absolutely adoring accent. The score was impeccable, especially the sound of the typewriter. I loved the scenes from Dunkirk, the hospital, and ,of course, the mansion. It's truly an amazing movie that I consider to be the best of 2007's. The ending was rather sad, but it fits perfectly. Keira Knightley was ineffably wonderful with her charming beauty and brilliant performance. One should really go and watch it because it's a fulfilling experience. I personally give it 10/10.
- mysterious_boy_92
- Feb 6, 2008
- Permalink
The superb Ian McEwan book translated into cold beautiful images by the startling Joe Wright and scriptwriter Christopher Hampton. The result is a series of powerful rushes and abrupt stops. A pacing that, perhaps, is a bit too self conscious for its own good doesn't help us to connect the emotional dots. I had the feeling I had lost something in the love story of the protagonists - something that didn't happen to me reading the book. By the time the "injustice" takes place I was taken by the pain of the injustice but not by Knightley and McAvoy's liaison. Their love story is left to its own devices. The beauty of the images is overwhelming and the assuredness of Joe Wright at his second feature after the, much better, "Pride and Prejudice" keeps you going. The score tends to be monotonous and irritating but in spite of all that I intend to see "Atonement" again and I would recommend it with just the above mentioned reservations.
- littlemartinarocena
- Sep 22, 2007
- Permalink
A budding young writer named Briony witnesses an innocent act she doesn't fully understand between her older sister Cecilia (Keira Knightley) and long-time family servant Robbie (James McAvoy) one restless summer day on her family's lavish country estate in 1935 England that leads to scandal in Joe Wright's dreadfully sumptuous adaptation of Ian McEwan's international best-selling novel, "Atonement." Four years later, all three characters try to find their own personal sense of peace or redemption during WWII.
This brief synopsis does nothing to explain the intricate complexities of the plot and actions that take place. Although Keira Knightley's performance is slightly off-putting due to the fact she appears like she just escaped from a concentration camp (surely young British socialites did not look like this in the 1930's), the stunning cast shows full range here racing through curious emotions: spite, lust, recklessness, and selfish wanton abandon. The facial expressions, especially from the children in the early scenes on the estate, are priceless. None of the characters are particularly sympathetic as they are often vain, self-absorbed, and quite silly in their drama, but they are fascinating to watch. The first third of the film is played like a "Masterpiece Theater" production of "The Great Gatsby" as seen through the eyes of Nancy Drew.
However, what makes "Atonement" soar is the impeccable direction of Joe Wright. He makes the most audacious coming-of-age as an auteur since Anthony Minghella delivered "The English Patient" back in 1996. Wright displays a near Kubrickian mastery of sound effects (notice the strikes of the typewriter keys) that transition from scene to scene and often bleed into the amazing score from Dario Marianelli. Wright also crafts a finely textured mise-en-scene that visually translates McEwan's richly composed story onto the screen with near note perfect fashion. Nothing can really prepare you for how well directed this film is until you see it, and the scene of the three soldiers arriving on the beach at the Dunkirk evacuation is one of the greatest stand alone unedited panning long shots ever captured on film. It left me gasping.
That scene leads to the heart of the film. The often clichéd romance at the core is trumped by Wright's depiction of Robbie, a single man forlorn and obsessed, his dizzying inner turmoil reflected against the grand canvas of a chaotic world at war. Likewise, Briony's redemption comes not in the too-clever conclusion at the end of the film, but in the intimate and symbolic confessional at the bedside of a dying French soldier. These moments leave lasting impressions, and left me imagining that if Joe Wright were to ever adapt Irene Nemiorovsky's "Suite Francaise" onto the silver screen, he would knock it so far out of the park it would leave "Gone With Wind" spinning in its gilded Hollywood grave.
This brief synopsis does nothing to explain the intricate complexities of the plot and actions that take place. Although Keira Knightley's performance is slightly off-putting due to the fact she appears like she just escaped from a concentration camp (surely young British socialites did not look like this in the 1930's), the stunning cast shows full range here racing through curious emotions: spite, lust, recklessness, and selfish wanton abandon. The facial expressions, especially from the children in the early scenes on the estate, are priceless. None of the characters are particularly sympathetic as they are often vain, self-absorbed, and quite silly in their drama, but they are fascinating to watch. The first third of the film is played like a "Masterpiece Theater" production of "The Great Gatsby" as seen through the eyes of Nancy Drew.
However, what makes "Atonement" soar is the impeccable direction of Joe Wright. He makes the most audacious coming-of-age as an auteur since Anthony Minghella delivered "The English Patient" back in 1996. Wright displays a near Kubrickian mastery of sound effects (notice the strikes of the typewriter keys) that transition from scene to scene and often bleed into the amazing score from Dario Marianelli. Wright also crafts a finely textured mise-en-scene that visually translates McEwan's richly composed story onto the screen with near note perfect fashion. Nothing can really prepare you for how well directed this film is until you see it, and the scene of the three soldiers arriving on the beach at the Dunkirk evacuation is one of the greatest stand alone unedited panning long shots ever captured on film. It left me gasping.
That scene leads to the heart of the film. The often clichéd romance at the core is trumped by Wright's depiction of Robbie, a single man forlorn and obsessed, his dizzying inner turmoil reflected against the grand canvas of a chaotic world at war. Likewise, Briony's redemption comes not in the too-clever conclusion at the end of the film, but in the intimate and symbolic confessional at the bedside of a dying French soldier. These moments leave lasting impressions, and left me imagining that if Joe Wright were to ever adapt Irene Nemiorovsky's "Suite Francaise" onto the silver screen, he would knock it so far out of the park it would leave "Gone With Wind" spinning in its gilded Hollywood grave.
- WriterDave
- Dec 9, 2007
- Permalink
- Michael_Elliott
- Feb 24, 2008
- Permalink
At a gathering in a country house a jealous little girl meddles in her sister's love life, and things will never be the same ...
From an interesting novel that had an engrossing first half but, for me, trailed off in the second. So I had a different experience with the film adaptation, where the country house scenes are not quite satisfying but the following war story is brilliantly told. The narrator is a fascinating little character, but looking back I think her motivation needed to be colder and her atonement more problematic. In the end the story is wrapped up with a talking head, which I guess was unavoidable but not the mark of a great movie.
The long tracking shot on the beach at Dunkirk is amazing - not only a technical marvel (the amount of ground covered, the multiple interactions) but it creates a great sense of chaos and despair.
Performances are good, and it's no wonder people raved about Ronan. The music is excellent and plays about with the rhythm of a tapping type writer. Photography too, although I didn't get the sense of oppressive heat in the first act.
Overall: interesting and impressive, but some big flaws.
From an interesting novel that had an engrossing first half but, for me, trailed off in the second. So I had a different experience with the film adaptation, where the country house scenes are not quite satisfying but the following war story is brilliantly told. The narrator is a fascinating little character, but looking back I think her motivation needed to be colder and her atonement more problematic. In the end the story is wrapped up with a talking head, which I guess was unavoidable but not the mark of a great movie.
The long tracking shot on the beach at Dunkirk is amazing - not only a technical marvel (the amount of ground covered, the multiple interactions) but it creates a great sense of chaos and despair.
Performances are good, and it's no wonder people raved about Ronan. The music is excellent and plays about with the rhythm of a tapping type writer. Photography too, although I didn't get the sense of oppressive heat in the first act.
Overall: interesting and impressive, but some big flaws.
- MissMovieLuver88
- Sep 15, 2007
- Permalink
I went to see this film last night. I had high expectations because it has received an extremely high vote average on the IMDb. Coupled to that I have read a couple of Ian McEwan novels, The Cement Garden, and The Comfort of Strangers. Both novels are exquisite, and McEwan is a total master of fiction. The Comfort of Strangers was a bruising read and The Cement Garden was incredibly trenchant and reminded me of my own upbringing.
So I had some doubts about whether his intensity could be brought to screen (although the film of Cement Garden is rather good). I did actually groan when I saw in the first credits that the film was a Working Title production, because although I know they have a good reputation, generally speaking I hate their stuff. Far too glossy and bland.
The first shot was very promising, a dolls house trompe a l'oeil and exquisitely arranged toys. The Camera pans from the house to the troupe of toy soldiers and plastic bestiary, which taper towards a desk where we see the precocious stripling Briony typing out the last words of her first play. The uncanny organisation of the toys is a powerful indication of the girl's state of mind: both fanciful and controlling. A coup de maitre worthy of McEwan. Then there is a soundtrack where the main instrument is a typewriter. A very bold strategem indeed as in my opinion cinema needs to distance itself from literature, but entirely successful.
From there the level of directorial virtuosity declines rather rapidly, we see that a vat of money is used to substitute for creativity, and the audience is meant to be wowed by painstaking and yet quite beside-the-point recreations of scenes from the war. We've had all this with Gangs of New York, Saving Private Ryan, and other tepid 'masterpieces' ad infinitum.
Having said that there is actually a continuous shot of Dunkirk in this film which lasts five minutes that I know will have even the most cynical of film watchers drooling. It is as a character says like a scene from the Bible, I have seen a similar looking Breughel print.
However the film is meant to be a love story, and by God, it does not convince me as one. The love between Cecilia and Robbie is not properly established, and most of the other characters are cardboard cut-outs. I felt the film could have been a lot longer to enable some character development. The only fully fledged character is Briony. How I long for the days of Billy Wilder who established the journalistic character of Chuck Tatum in Ace in the Hole simply by having him strike a match on a typewriter in a very practised manner.
Some of the scenes in France during the fighting I am sure would work better in the novel, in the film they are really a bit devoid of context. Finally the end of the film is a conceit that really failed to impress me, and I won't give it away but the atonement strikes me as very hollow.
I think this movie tries very hard to be an epic after the fashion of The English Patient, unfortunately it becomes rather tired and generic. Having said that the source material is of such a quality and the amount of money spent seemingly so vast that the film is very enjoyable. But nowhere near a masterpiece.
So I had some doubts about whether his intensity could be brought to screen (although the film of Cement Garden is rather good). I did actually groan when I saw in the first credits that the film was a Working Title production, because although I know they have a good reputation, generally speaking I hate their stuff. Far too glossy and bland.
The first shot was very promising, a dolls house trompe a l'oeil and exquisitely arranged toys. The Camera pans from the house to the troupe of toy soldiers and plastic bestiary, which taper towards a desk where we see the precocious stripling Briony typing out the last words of her first play. The uncanny organisation of the toys is a powerful indication of the girl's state of mind: both fanciful and controlling. A coup de maitre worthy of McEwan. Then there is a soundtrack where the main instrument is a typewriter. A very bold strategem indeed as in my opinion cinema needs to distance itself from literature, but entirely successful.
From there the level of directorial virtuosity declines rather rapidly, we see that a vat of money is used to substitute for creativity, and the audience is meant to be wowed by painstaking and yet quite beside-the-point recreations of scenes from the war. We've had all this with Gangs of New York, Saving Private Ryan, and other tepid 'masterpieces' ad infinitum.
Having said that there is actually a continuous shot of Dunkirk in this film which lasts five minutes that I know will have even the most cynical of film watchers drooling. It is as a character says like a scene from the Bible, I have seen a similar looking Breughel print.
However the film is meant to be a love story, and by God, it does not convince me as one. The love between Cecilia and Robbie is not properly established, and most of the other characters are cardboard cut-outs. I felt the film could have been a lot longer to enable some character development. The only fully fledged character is Briony. How I long for the days of Billy Wilder who established the journalistic character of Chuck Tatum in Ace in the Hole simply by having him strike a match on a typewriter in a very practised manner.
Some of the scenes in France during the fighting I am sure would work better in the novel, in the film they are really a bit devoid of context. Finally the end of the film is a conceit that really failed to impress me, and I won't give it away but the atonement strikes me as very hollow.
I think this movie tries very hard to be an epic after the fashion of The English Patient, unfortunately it becomes rather tired and generic. Having said that the source material is of such a quality and the amount of money spent seemingly so vast that the film is very enjoyable. But nowhere near a masterpiece.
- oOgiandujaOo_and_Eddy_Merckx
- Oct 10, 2007
- Permalink
Well, from the trailers I could tell this would be an epic film before I was even able to see it. I managed to attend a gala screening of the film last night and I thought it was amazing. Despite my constant dislike to Keira Knightly, I was unable to disapprove of her acting in this film. She has improved massively since the first pirates film. The film itself has an intriguing plot line which keeps you hooked throughout. The film includes humour at the start and fascination by the end. I loved watching this film and I enjoyed the smartness of the story. The film is cleverly done with jumps in time and different perspectives of events throughout which will leave you understanding the motives of each character more. The music is composed beautifully, the orchestral tunes accompanied with the clatter that a typewriter makes creates a beautiful piece of music that fits perfectly with the film itself. I have since begun to read the book, the only thing that the film lacks is the character depth that a book can write about but a film simply can't explain. I feel that the film shows what happened but the book is able to explain a little more as to why the events occurred. Overall the film was beautiful, brilliant and emotional.
- Theo Robertson
- Dec 26, 2012
- Permalink