Anyone watch this movie?
What did you think about it?
shareYeah, I thought it was really good. Just got done seeing it, in fact, and came here to see what others had to say about it. Not much at this point!
You could see the twist coming, but it was a great character study and a compelling portrait of a woman who has some kind of ungodly power for selflessness. Really an intriguing look at a strange dynamic with top-knotch acting. I definitely recommend this one.
The book does, I think, a better , or at least more layered job of explaining why Joan Castleman spent all those years doing what she did. It suggests that at first , it was sort of fun for them both to be fooling everyone.
It also explores more aspects of the the cultural straightjacket women writers were in at that time, and the small but crucial role played by Elizabeth McGovern is given more focus.
Its no wonder women didn't ghost write as men more often then, you know?
The line that struck me the most? When she says, "You introduced me as someone who doesn't write, when I just won the goddamn Nobel prize" or whatever. That captured the movie for me. I mean, could you even imagine being in her position? Having reached the pinnacle of literary achievement...to have that kind of genius upstairs, yet walk through life, not only pretending like you don't, but deflecting all accolades onto someone else? And that someone else being a cheat of a husband, whose errant behavior is dismissed as just the price of unfettered intellect or whatever stupid such thing.
Yeah I BET the book would be better, insofar as how interesting it'd be to understand the machinations of a woman who could be this dang selfless. Was she that much in love with him? Or was it more about family preservation...or both. She long ago resigned herself to this...and then to win the Nobel prize at some point....what a great story, because yeah, that'd be the point where someone would pop, you know? lol
Him bouncing on the bed, "I just won the nobel prize! I just won the Nobel prize!"
Its interesting that they'd been in their roles for so long that the celebration really WAS about him. Even in private. You'd think that any other person would have been congratulating HER, but not this guy...and my guess is that she loved him so much that she wouldn't have had it any other way. She did that. She nourished the relationship's dynamic to that end, to achieve just that result, IMO.
And then he just couldn't help himself that one last time...she'd sacrificed herself for so long....and then it was like a light had been flicked, she was done.
Sorry to ramble, just really, really an interesting study of a woman so far beyond remarkable that she can only exist in fiction. Glenn Close manages to make you believe otherwise though, that performance. Great movie, all the way around, IMO.
Not rambling at all!
You know , I don't think she did it out of selfless all-consuming love , even in the beginning when she certainly did love and even revere him. She knew very early on he had 'feet of clay'. She was, in those early days very unsure of herself though, and was convinced by the Elizabeth McGovern character ( sorry I forget the name ) that it was going to be an uphill, hopeless struggle to get published at all, no matter how good she was.
The vicarious fame and fortune became a sort of daily reality , and yes I agree he actually pretty much convinced himself that it was really him who was the great author , and she was merely his private editor.
The Helsinki prize affair was as you say , the final straw and she knew she could no longer go on with the charade particularly after his doing the elaborate thank you she had begged him not to do . Which he did, of course, not because he really wanted to honour her but because people would think badly of him if he didn't do it . In the book she has decided to leave him before even getting to Helsinki.
Helsinki?
shareI distinctly remember them jumping on the bed saying "We just won the Nobel Prize." Very different meaning and has the feel that they are in on a joke together.
As for the selflessness, women have been generally trained to be this way in the past, and even in more recent times it shows up when you'd think these women are liberated. Technically, yes, psycho-culturally, no.