|Page 16 of 33:||               |
|Index||326 reviews in total|
I have never reviewed a movie though I'm a heavy movie fan, but this movie's very unbelievable and stupid plot and reviews of some of the people made me write this review. The rating of a movie on IMDb was one of the strong factors that I used, to put a movie on my watch list and today it became clear, I had an epiphany, a eureka moment of sort. I thought why are you not enjoying the movies lately? is it because all the movies have gotten worse? or is it because you are getting old? and suddenly it hit me! it's because I use the ratings that people give to the stupid movies like this one. Put one or two Innocent looking and/or beautiful characters as Keira Knightley in a movie, now, give it a sad, miserable and emotional story with not so happy ending and you'll have yourself a movie that will rate above 6 or 7 on IMDb. I now know what I'm gonna do with my life, I'm gonna make stupid movies and get rich and famous. People, please don't waste your time and money watching this movie, go and have a nap for 1.5 hours, go walk your dog or just lay on the couch have some nice thoughts about something you like but don't Please DO NOT waste your time on this crap.
The movie was not up to my expectation. I had heard praises about this
movie and started to watch with great enthusiasm. However, as the movie
unravels itself, it appears to me that the plot gets weaker and finally
drops dead. The lack of climax, twists and surprises makes the journey
boring and depressing. We are presented with the same contradictions
about the clones like the movie "The Island". The storyline is
basically the same: human clones, their unfortunate
romances,helplessness in the face of reality and subtle ethical issues.
The clones in "The Island" had the courage to stand up and fight. But
here the donors are submissive and in a sense aloof to their existence.
Also the story couldn't specify why the donors are not using their
freedom to break the shackle of injustice.
The subtle issues about love and betrayal adds some spice but still it does not make any sense. If the donors had the power of jealousy and betrayal then they must rebel against the injustice. Their "goody-goody" nature cannot explain the three cigarettes,passionate sex(without any pregnancies!) and the jealousy.
The good thing about the movie is that the acting is appealing and touchy. The rustic beauty of England and the calm England weather is portrayed beautifully.The camera work is awesome and the music composition is soothing and at times depressing . The acting was also up to the mark. So, I think this movie is a waste of talent. With a different plot and script, using this same set,great camera work and remarkable actors, the director could produce a much better film .
Never Let Me Go: As children, Ruth, Kathy and Tommy, spend their
childhood at a seemingly idyllic English boarding school. As they grow
into young adults, they find that they have to come to terms with the
strength of the love they feel for each other, while preparing
themselves for the haunting reality that awaits them.
i waited anxiously for this movie to come, and finally i saw it and yes i loved it. i haven't read the book but know a lot of great things about it, i wounder how excellent the book must be because i loved this movie. this was a very haunting and disturbing movie and one of the most melodramatic and sad movie i have seen lately. the movie starts and ends really well, and goes the way it should, i was never bored while watching this movie, my interest level was high the whole time while i was watching it.
Story of this movie is extremely different and very new, i have never ever seen anything like it. screenplay is very good moves along and never dull or hollow. its written very well. the cinematography is marvelous one of the best looking drama ever. art direction and costumes are excellent, exactly how they should be. Performances wise this movie was very good again, Carey Mulligan is extraordinary, she knows what she do and very good and excellent at her job, this character was made for her, she was just superb and she looked like a beauty queen wonderful looking fine young lady, i love her. Keira Knightley was good in some scenes, she plays a supporting character. she looked good also. good performance. on the other hand, the breakthrough young actor Andrew Garfield was excellent too, towards the end of this film, he looks and plays his character with superb grace and brilliance. some scenes really made me emotional if not made me cry.
some how i felt like i was not connected that much to these characters but still i felt everything and every emotion shown. direction was excellent. there were some other supporting actors like Charlotte Rampling and Sally Hawkins, they were decent. this movie on the whole is very touching, thoughtful, depressing romantic drama. the impact of the emotion is slowly built and then... bang .... it never lets us go. a chilling and dramatic high school British romantic drama with a touch of sci fi. Brilliant, too good. Do watch.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Beneath its thin sci-fi veneer, its pedigree in middlebrow literature and its humorless Merchant Ivory tonality, this thing reveals itself as a shallow, clichéd chick flick that drags itself v-e-r-y slowly to a conclusion that's predictable not only because it's flashed at us at the start. The sci-fi premise, which can't be discussed in any detail without spoilers, is at least as old as Michael Chrichton's "Coma." But the storytelling is far more old-fashioned, reaching back to the weepy melodramas of the 19th century. Two girls and a boy who meet in a stereotypically menacing boarding school grow up as a tangled love triangle. As they drape and loll around glumly, we're reminded every frame that this is A TRAGEDY: every interior is dark and shadowy, every exterior a cloudy day, and every second of the film has morbid strings groaning and ululating underneath. All right, we get it! We're supposed to be sad! But we're not, because the three young people are such dull ciphers. The first act, when they're kids in the school, is the best. The kid actors are all surprisingly good, and a sense of foreboding and mystery builds for a little while -- until it crashes to a halt when one of the characters does a quick Basil Exposition and tells us, in a few short lines, pretty much the whole tale. Thus the 2nd and 3rd acts, where they're young adults, are anticlimactic and absolutely devoid of dramatic tension or narrative propulsion. After many slow, dark, rainy, shadowy, quiet scenes, the foregone conclusion is reached, the strings wail like a chorus of hired mourners, and it's over. Pffft.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Do you know anyone who isn't an organ donor? The topic isn't likely to
arise in conversation, but really, why not be one? Unless your religion
prevents it, you ostensibly have nothing to lose but your dead self.
Some people even like to believe that they will "live on" somehow when
part of their body is transplanted. That's a crazy idea. The only way
to "live on" would be to transplant one's brain into another's body. No
one wants to be that inconvenienced.
What some advocates suggest sounds better on paper: growth of spare human parts. The problem is doing so requires raising a person only to slowly kill him as his body is robbed. And this is the basis for Never Let me Go, an evocative adaptation of a Kazuo Ishiguru's popular novel. It takes place in an alternative world where many diseases have been cured by replacing infected organs with grown ones. The story is narrated by Kathy (Carey Mulligan) who recalls her life right before her timely death.
Kathy begins life as a student in Hailsham boarding school with her two best friends Ruth (Keira Knightley) and Tommy (Andrew Garfield). She and her friends spend a lot of time learning about poetry, making arts and crafts, and exercising. They need no technical skills. Kathy and Tommy develop an infatuation with each other that lasts throughout adolescence even as he becomes involved with Ruth. After graduation the young people begin living in a community setting and working occasional jobs. Kathy begins working as a nurse where donations are made, and Ruth's relationship with Tommy evolves into a deep bitterness between the women. The three don't see each other for a while, until their donations begin and Ruth dies. Tommy reconciles with his childhood crush and ascertains whether there is any way to delay their inevitable separation.
Scenery assumes a crucial role. Like Raise the Red Lantern, the three characters are nearly always within defined spaces. They are either in school, their living community (a cabin), or the hospital. Only near the end do we see them outside of these confined spaces perhaps surrounded by the lives they never got to finish. Kathy being the central tragic figure is the only one with full mobility outside these spaces. From what we learn of popular opinion regarding farmed people, any outside presence may disappear. It wastes resources.
The movie is aided greatly by its simplicity. This is a human love story with spices of Shakespearian tragedy revealed slowly. Viewers need to pay attention to comprehend it. The drama is made meaningful by its focus on the character's themselves. Nothing is contrived about the picture because it ignores a melodramatic "great escape" setup and it doesn't create a fantasy world much different from our own. What we get is instead a serious film about people forced to deal with an unfortunate issue.
Key term, people. Kathy, Ruth, and Tommy all behave like real humans would. Ruth selfishly destroys the relationship between her two friends because she's an inexperienced person. She later regrets acting poorly and makes amends, even though they will have little impact. Kathy and Tommy can never be together because of a human development, and their separation is furthered by another human development. People aren't commodities even if their bodies are.
This is not science fiction as the first moments of the movie suggests,
it's a drama with the science fictionish frame around it. Since it's
not science fiction, nothing is explained and sometimes the passiveness
of the characters or the melodrama without fully explained reasons
really gives the movie a somewhat hollow feeling. To make up for these
shortcomings, it goes into full tear jerker mode. Everyone is skilled
enough to pull it off and the movie skillfully presents a gloomy,
brooding atmosphere but we are all left questioning why and why not
this or that? Especially, why didn't they just run away?
If you don't mind tear jerkers and dramas, this movie will suit you fine. However, if you were expecting a Gattacaesque sci-fi, you will be sorely disappointed.
Greetings again from the darkness. Let me say that it's great to have
Mark Romanek back directing films. His most recent feature was 2002's
"One Hour Photo" which I found masterful. Here he has source material
from the acclaimed novel of Kazuo Ishiguro ("The Remains of the Day")
and does an admirable job depicting this underground world of test tube
replacement parts. Despite the numerous opportunities for moral and
philosophical statements, the film does a nice job of staying true to
the novel and avoiding the soapbox.
We are introduced to Kathy, Tommy and Ruth. They are 3 friends being raised at Hailsham - a cross between an orphanage, boarding school and laboratory. The kids have no idea of their purpose in life and just go about their days as instructed - never really finding a need to question their existence ... though many "stories" of the place have evolved over the years.
One day, a teacher played by Sally Hawkins breaks the code and explains to the children that their sole purpose in life is to be harvested for body parts. Sure this theme has been explored previously, but not really from the kids' perspective. Ms. Hawkins' character is instantly relieved of her duties by the cold-natured head mistress played perfectly by Charlotte Rampling.
Flash forward a few years and the three are played by Carey Mulligan (Kathy), Andrew Garfield (Tommy) and Keira Knightley (Ruth). We see a romance develop between Ruth and Tommy, though it's obvious the real connection is between Kathy and Tommy. As they move to "the cottages" (a middle step in development), they learn a bit more about the real world.
It's not until a few years later when we see how two of them have fulfilled their obligation, while one has delayed by playing "a carer" to donors, that we see just how bleak this existence is. The real questions are raised by Kathy as she wonders just how different their lives are than those in the real world. It seems both sides have regrets, unrealized dreams and a shortage of time. Here endeth the lesson.
This film is gathering a bit of Oscar buzz from the critics, but I must admit that I found it leaving entirely too much up to the audience. There are too many gaps to fill and not really much conflict or drama. It is finely made and well acted, but comes up short of what I would expect from a true Oscar contender.
Sorry, but I found this film very disappointing. Some of the scenes
were visually beautiful, but Carey Mulligan was let down by a poor
script, poor supporting actors and actresses and poor direction.
Expecting something of an art-house gem, what we got was a pretentious
little film in which the acting was wooden, the story line inconsistent
and the overall package a failure. I came away from the cinema unmoved
Perhaps I was watching this at one level when I should have be looking for the deeper meanings beneath the surface? I find it amazing that others have rated this film so highly. No, this is one film that did not live up to the hype, for me at least.
I'm not saying don't see it - see it and make up your own minds - but it really did not work for me.
I just cannot get enough of this story . Usually, it is a habit to look for inconsistencies, but in this film that just does not matter. Kathy , young and older, are so perfect as choices for that character. It is well known a British public school contributed to the words and music for Hailsham's school song. I know this to be the case in another British film. And, I discovered Carey Mulligan. She is the greatest. Please understand the films which I grew up with now make up the bulk of TCM Films! So, I am discovering all new actors and having a ball doing so!
Reviewed March 2012
It comes across to me as a highly toned down and sensitive version of The Island. But the only problem here is that there is no plot building as it leaves nothing for the viewer to expect after a little while into the movie. The entire movie feels like one long dragging scene.
Young versions of Ruth (Keira Knihtley) and Kathy (Carey Mulligan) are friends and classmates in a special boarding school which takes care of students who will grow up to be organ donors. Tommy (Andrew Garfield) is another student who is always picked on for his temper and slow mind. Kathy develops a soft spot for Tommy and becomes friends with him but Ruth being jealous of their connection barges in and gets Tommy under her whim. They grow and grow apart where Kathy becomes a carer for donors. She meets Ruth after 10 years during her regular job by when Ruth has finished 2 donations and in a bad shape. She comes to know that Tommy and Ruth are no longer together and goes to find Tommy.
In the film's first scene they show how it is going to end. So it is one slow long wait for it to get formally completed. It features a visually excellent backdrop and the cast does a tremendous job portraying their characters. A single thread background music keeps repeating occasionally and it is quite good. The main culprit is the screenplay as it never builds up to anything and there is only so much one can emote with the characters singular problem.
Though artistic and well performed, this one required a lot more life to save the characters.
|Page 16 of 33:||               |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|