IMDb > The Hours (2002) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The Hours
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
The Hours More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 7 of 65: [Prev][2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [Next]
Index 649 reviews in total 

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Meticulous, rich, layered triptych

8/10
Author: Framescourer from London, UK
2 January 2007

Over-insistent score from Philip Glass aside, this is a fine film. In fact the music helps with regard to illuminating the complex emotional taffeta-colour of the characters. It just makes too great a claim for itself. All other contributions are directed and selfless.

I would start in this respect with the flowers. That's where it had me when I saw it at the cinema: the technicolour explosion of the Manhattan flower shop (a Vertigo nod) gives way to the unreal cornflower blue of Woolf's Richmond house, the same blue as the icing on Laura's husband's birthday cake. All this would be lost were it not for the frame by frame intensity of Seamus McGarvey's attention to the shoot. An awesome achievement in any strand of the story.

Well, Hare and Daldry have come up trumps adapting Cunningham's book with this dense attention to design and editing panache. This would be enough to recommend a viewing but nothing quite prepares one for the power and elusiveness of the three central performances. Nicole Kidman was Oscarified but quite rightly incorporated herself with Moore and Streep. Kidman is no passenger however - her work with Miranda Richardson is the gold standard met by the others. Moore's character is an easier, stripped down trope. With Safe and Far From Heaven already worked through she could phone this in - instead she plays it even closer to the edge, like a terrifying, fresh axe wound. Streep's modern feminine conundrum utterly convinces. The naturalisation and intensity of support form Harris, Janney, Dillane and even Claire Danes means that it might be easy to miss just how good the principal triumvirate is.

The best tribute one might pay this film is that it manages beauty and horror simultaneously. The trajectory of the film is set in the suicidal prelude but one cannot help but watch, bewitched. Quite something. 8/10

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

The Hours holds its own because of the incredible acting

7/10
Author: bw11 from United States
9 October 2006

I knew the plot was supposed to be confusing as it switched back and forth between three time lines and three different women. I patiently waited for it to come together and it did -- but the plot itself did not really hold me enough to continue this two hour movie. What kept me watching was the incredible acting done by everyone on the screen. Our three main women -- Meryl Streep, Julianne Moore and Nichole Kidman were beyond scoring a ten. They were fantastic -- so believable. Kidman, wearing a false nose, was so dowdy it was hard to find her. She totally became Virginia Wolfe. Julianne Moore was incredible in her silent suffering. And Meryl is always incredible. The supporting actors held there own too. What an amazing group of talented actors.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Philosophising on Time

Author: Ion Martea from London, UK
4 December 2003

The most complex film since "Pulp Fiction" and "Howards End" was realized across UK on Valentine's Day. The Hours, directed by "Billy Elliot"'s Stephen Daldry, and based on the Pulitzer-winning novel by Michael Cunningham adapted by David Hare, is an epic about life, just as it is: rough, trivial, passionate; above all it is a masterful atomisation of the day-to-day life of an ordinary woman.

The action, or better said the lack of action, is concentrated in one single day of three women, 'and in that day {their} whole life'. Virginia Woolf (Nicole Kidman), battling insanity, starts writing in the early 1920s her highly acclaimed novel, Mrs. Dalloway, while 'avoiding life' in Richmond. Laura Brown (Julianne Moore) starts reading in Los Angeles the same book that is to affect her perfect family life in early 1950s. So we reach a climax, when Clarissa Vaughan (Meryl Streep) is to give life to Mrs. Dalloway in 2001 in New York. All the three stories come to be intertwined in Richard Brown (Ed Harris), a brilliant poet dying of AIDS, who is to become the victim of Virginia's novel, Laura's abandoned son, and the disillusionment in love, but also the peak of happiness, in Clarissa's 'meaningless' life.

"The Hours" is a film that is to disappoint anyone looking for entertainment while going to the cinema. There is little, almost, nothing in it, which would allude to a story. Nevertheless, the film contains one of the most powerful and poetic plots second maybe only to Kazan's "A Streetcar Named Desire" or "The Great Gatsby". Hare managed to recreate so exquisitely the Woolf's universe, full of ordinary characters, though all perfectionist in their triviality. This led to the creation of a very real picture of humanity in a never-changing time.

The main reason, though, why this picture is to remain a classic in the cinema history is the flawless female performances. If "Mrs. Dalloway" represented the step from a good to a great writer for Woolf, then "The Hours" is the membership ticket into the all-time top actresses league for Nicole Kidman, who manages to freeze motion with each gesture, to capture a mad universe in each look. Moore does her own share of work: pale, confused, loving and hating, she gives life to a character that looks so dead while staying alive. And then Streep comes with a metallic hysteria, with a depressing reality every time she defends the beauty of each wasted hour. Miranda Richardson, Toni Collette, Allison Janney, all leave memorable performances behind.

"The Hours" has left very little room for criticism. The one thing is that it may trigger a number of yawns in case one misjudges it for an appetiser of a long night out.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Kisses - Commentary on DVD - deleated scenes

Author: (tryferoskardia@aol.com) from NJ
16 September 2003

First I have to say The Hours is my 2nd favorite movie of all time!! (Ironically, my #1 fav is Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf)

Anyway, my only real disappointment of the Dvd is the director/screenplay commentary. I mean he went on and on about his book. This film is very intricate and a lot needed to be talked about. It would have been better had they done separate commentaries.

I was also disappointed that there were no deleted scenes. i noticed while watching the trailer of The Hours that there were 2 scenes not shown. One was of Danes and she was in the kitchen with a lot of lit candles. It goes by so fast its hard to catch. And the 2nd scene was of Sally and Clarissa hugging in what looked like white robes. its not a big deal but i hate when stuff that's not in the movie makes it in the trailer! oh well

On the Kisses, heres my thought

When I first saw the film I thought that Virginia WAS going for a reaction out of Vanessa. I dont think it was sexual at all. It was to try to get Vanessa to look at her, to really look at her coz nobody understood her or her feelings. Laura's kiss was more of comfort like the director or writer, i forget which one, said. I don't think she was a lesbian. I think she was soo unhappy that she was trying to console herself more than kitty. As for clarissa, I think her kiss with sally was one of "this is a new day". I think shes been in love with Richard all these years. she even said she's been stuck all these years. It wasn't the name, that's just what she told Luis. Her relationship with sally was of comfort and convince.

anyway, i loved this movie and i related with it incredibly. Clarissa is soooo me. And there are definatly parts of me in Virgina and Laura. This film, more than any other, is "me". I LOVE IT!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

AMAZING!

Author: Lucas Dunaway (lucas_dunaway@yahoo.com)
27 August 2003

This film is amazing. It's somewhat of a classic in its own time. Amazing costumes, sound, and acting. With a movie that includes Streep, Kidman, and Moore, who could go wrong. Its a 10/10! I still feel as though Streep should have earned an Oscar for her role. Kidman was so different... her acting style has changed for the better over the years. Moore was outstanding. The scene where she leaves her son and is going to the hotel is breathtaking!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Two unforgettable hours

9/10
Author: danielll_rs from Belo Horizonte, Brazil
7 June 2003

Not everyone liked THE HOURS, and that may be the reason why it took only one Oscar- Best Actress for Nicole Kidman. Having read the novel, I can say that the adaptation was amazing, but there's nothing wrong if you haven't read the novel.

Being a man, a young one but a man, I can't understand women but I'm still fascinated by them. THE HOURS is a feminine film (not a feminist one; there's a difference), but I could feel what these women felt, and that's the magic of cinema.

From Stephen Daldry's impeccable direction to the terrific performances, without dissonant notes, THE HOURS is a film to be remembered for years.

10/10

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

MUCH BETTER THAN RAMBO III

Author: protoboy from Europe, America
15 April 2003

I went to see this movie with my boyfr, he's a great movie expert and only takes me to french and alternative movies and the very few times we happen to laugh at every punchline and really enjoy the show we walk out of the theater and go "humpf, a bit predictable, wasn't it?!"

Such things considered, we HAD to like this boring movie. The story carries on with no real plot, Harris is too cute as a child to ever want to touch a woman in his life (especially mrs.'5 layers of makeup' Streep), Julian Moore plays no more than some leftover footage from 'Away from heaven' and Nicole Kidman almost risks a heart attack realizing she's much more glamorous and touching with a fake nose than waving her legs as la belle epoque of the third millennium or quitting her pathetic marriage with baby face Tom. The Oscar was indeed for best make-up originally, but George Bush really deserved that one for his 'war against terrorism' so they went for best actress instead.

So what? The movie is nice because in the first 5 minutes you get a hint of what a nice movie is made of. Philip Glass's a pain in the ass (rhymes) but this time he matches the atmosphere perfectly, the editing is very clever and the three women wake up to a new day of despair, while our day desperately fades watching what's left of the poetry of Mrs.Woolf in our days.

Movies must not be judged for what they really show, but for what you would have liked them to show you. And just as I would have loved to know more about Virgina Woolf and her inner feelings, I was actually only shown that when you wear a nasty victorian dress, even if you are miss Kidman you will still look like your grandma. So I'll go out and buy some smart clothes, and forget about the nose surgery...thanks Virginia!

God bless, life is pretty miserable if you can only choose between a) Living a lesbian affair with a woman who enters your bed in the morning after checking local darkrooms security exits all night; b) Leaving your dumb husband and kids, ruining their life to a point they'll write cheesy novels about it; c) Jump in the river (that seems fair enough, but why that dress again?)

I chose already. George Clooney in a bathtub filled with olive oil.

On the rocks.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Beautiful...but NOT for everyone

9/10
Author: mezaco from usa
18 February 2003

This is definately a polarizing film, with the Oscar nominations clearly clashing with the comments here about people walking out, people hating it, etc.

I could not help but be moved by this film. It's very difficult to pin down, I could not give a "plot summary" even if I was paid to. But the sadness, the yearning inside these women is hypnotic. Sometimes the film, does wallow a bit deep, like the scene with Meryl Streep and Claire Danes talking on the bed. But this is a film that takes subjects like depression, sadness, what it means to live and what it means to die and examines them, thinks about them, probes them.

The acting by the three main stars, not the mention the impressive list of supporting characters (especially the magnificent Ed Harris) is stunning. Seeing three actresses show their craft, their devotion to their art, is a real gift. The beautiful soundtrack adds a haunting and moving backdrop as well.

In today's film world, where Spiderman and Daredevil are the box office favorites, is there any room for a sad film about depression and death? Maybe, maybe not. But I'm glad to see a daring film that leaves you thinking long after. It leaves you thinking about the characters, their thoughts, their behaviour.

But if you don't think you COULD enjoy this film, stay home. I have no patience for people who expected "The Hours" to be other than what it was. If you need your movie plots to be banged over your head with a hammer, please stay away. This movie deserves better.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Lots of wierd comments about a great movie.

10/10
Author: lndc98 from San Francisco, California
14 February 2003

Well, if the sign of a work of art is the heated debate, love, and antipathy it inspires, then "The Hours" is a great work of art. I will say no more about why I loved it. I just want to remark about comments made about the film that seem pretty irrelevant to me. (1) Nicole Kidman's nose: I have only one thing to say here: "Get over it!" (2) Philip Glass' score: This was a beautiful tense piano score done by a fine composer. Remember the score in "Kundun", everybody?? (3) Last, but surely not least, the comment that this is a movie for "women and effeminate men": This comment I could not believe when I actually read it here. "Effeminate men"???!!! I haven't heard that term in decades. And who are they anyway? Well, we all know what was meant. So, I ask: Is our homophobia showing, guys? Movies in which women and gay men are characters are about people who have the same issues that everyone else does. Amen and get over it.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Nicole Kidman is officially the most versatile actress of her generation!

10/10
Author: Good-Evening-Clarice from Burbank, CA
14 February 2003

Forget the much-discussed prosthetic nose she dons to play the part of Virginia Woolf. Nicole Kidman's bravura performance in the masterful new drama THE HOURS transcends tangible transformation. The striking, leggy and elegant poise we have come to expect from the actress is not only lost in a completely new gait but her voice is absolutely unrecognizable as well. It is shrouded in a thick, foggy British accent. She really utilizes everything in her power to manifest the inner anguish and torment that Woolf suffers. Watch this film for Nicole's transformation if for nothing else; she has clearly transformed ever since her divorce--into the best, less predictable actress of her generation!

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 7 of 65: [Prev][2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history