On Tuesday, Dec. 1, at 7 p.m. ET/4 p.m. PT, IMDb Asks brings you a livestream Q&A and online chat with Lisa Edelstein. Tune in to Amazon.com/LisaEdelstein to participate in the live conversation and even ask a question yourself. Plus, catch up with Christina Ricci, star of new Amazon pilot "Z." The livestream is best viewed on laptops, desktops, and tablets.
Micky is a tough, loudmouth but lovable 12 year old who lives with his younger brother and sister at his grandmother's house. One day, a meteorite lands in his backyard and the kids believe... See full summary »
Paul Slippery (Hugh Laurie), a forty-something doctor, lives with his wife Estelle and three sex-obsessed sons Rory, Daniel and Edwin in the west London suburb of Putney. On top of coping ... See full summary »
Mark Lindsay Chapman was initially cast the role of John Lennon but lost the part because his name was similar to that of Lennon's assassin. Chapman later played John Lennon in the movie Chapter 27 (2007). See more »
John's hair is shown at shoulder-length for most of the early 1970s portions of the movie. In fact, John's hair was usually collar-length through these years, and he spent much of 1973 shaved bald. See more »
This tele-film is visually and, to a lesser degree, audibly charming in favour of suspending one's disbelief that we are actually a fly-on-the-wall witnessing John Lennon and Yoko Ono from their initial beginning together to their final and tragic end. The period covered, therefore, is from 1966 to 1980. The Beatles' score and solo work are used to help convey the story mirroring the feelings felt at the time even though chronologically it can be inaccurate at times. But no matter, as I said above, it adds to the study of emotion that this film is all about: A Love Story.
Now this is where it falls apart for me. The film becomes a rather syrupy soap opera and is too light weight. The film uses the interesting lives of two famous people in order to relate a love story, but this is strictly my own disappointment for something more. Objectively the film delivers what the title promises but do not expect a Beatles Anthology-type retrospective. The viewpoint is very one sided but this, too, is in keeping with the filmmaker's concept.
I mentioned earlier the film was too light weight. As a tele-film this is usually the case but I don't see it as an excuse for average production values. Technically, the film is rather amateurish. Standard camera work, poor lighting and poor film quality, but this may be due to funds. Also, the story hops along rather abruptly leaving the impression the film is more a story based on pages of a photo album with little cohesion to the lives of two people. But, to be fair, it may be asking too much to make the story segue successfully as film length is an important consideration.
In conclusion, despite my criticism, the film is enjoyable in a casual way and not a complete waste of time to view providing one does not enter into it too seriously.
4 of 8 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?