In a poor working class London home Penny's love for her partner, taxi-driver Phil, has run dry, but when an unexpected tragedy occurs, they and their local community are brought together, and they rediscover their love.
Set in the 1880s, the story of how, during a creative dry spell, the partnership of the legendary musical/theatrical writers Gilbert and Sullivan almost dissolves, before they turn it all around and write the Mikado.
Poppy Cross is happy-go-lucky. At 30, she lives in Camden: cheeky, playful, frank while funny, and talkative to strangers. She's a conscientious and exuberant primary-school teacher, flatmates with Zoe, her long-time friend; she's close to one sister, and not so close to another. In this slice of life story, we watch her take driving lessons from Scott, a dour and tightly-wound instructor, take classes in flamenco dance from a fiery Spaniard, encounter a tramp in the night, and sort out a student's aggressive behavior with a social worker's help. Along the way, we wonder if her open attitude puts her at risk of misunderstanding or worse. What is the root of happiness?Written by
Sally Hawkins and Alexis Zegerman became good friends during filming. Hawkins invited Zegerman along to the 66th Golden Globe Awards ceremony, on the eve when she eventually won for her performance in this film. See more »
In the build up to the final (aborted) driving lesson Scott (Eddie Marsan) is seen turning right into Holloway road (half way up and heading north), then moments later they are seen navigating the Highbury and Islington roundabout, turning into again into Holloway road about half a mile south of the previous location. See more »
[pulls out book from shelf]
The Road to Reality...
[smiles and pushes the book back]
Don't wanna be going there!
See more »
I found Poppy to be annoying and unlikable except when she was with schoolchildren, which was only for a small time. There were a few mildly amusing bits of dialog but nothing particularly funny. The film went nowhere and explained nothing, even though it raised a number of relationship questions that could have been explored. We went to see it because the paper quoted a critic who gave it a 3.5 of 4 stars and said that it would all be explained "sanely." I didn't get it, even after reading several other folks' reviews. The acting was fine, which is why it wasn't a complete bomb, and I didn't walk out in the middle because I kept hoping that something--anything--would eventually become clear, although I was dying to look at my watch every few minutes. We were disappointed in our hopes. (Obviously this is my opinion because others felt that something did become clear.) I and a friend did not stay for the credits, which is very rare, because we just didn't care enough about any of it.
32 of 53 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this