MovieChat Forums > darkfrances > Replies
darkfrances's Replies
That's a very nice comment indeed.
Sarah was using Anne just as much as Abigail, only for a different purpose.
One can argue that Sarah was a true patriot, and had the country at heart - I don't think she wanted the war for pure power/personal reasons (although her husband was a prominent military figure, so hm). She did seem to be more than a political-career-freak.
But she was still using Anne. Well, she was using her a bit better than Abigail too, but she was still not around the queen out of sheer love.
So yeah, the poor hunk of faulty flesh in the shape of a queen wasn't truly loved by the humans in the court.
...And even the rabits were in for survival.
Ew.
Sure was - entertaining, or memorable, depending on how you see it.
But it was also too long for all it had to say...
She's actually quite good here, and her looks were important for her angel on the outside / cockroach on the inside character.
A bit like an apolitical Milady (the Dumas character).
2) 3) The cinematography and sprightly style were the things I appreciated about the movie. Various odd angles express the mental state of the characters, or the suffocating environment at the court. The poor queen was often reduced to a mass of flesh that required external intervention to be moved, so it's pretty creepy to think that someone actually lived in there.
And the historical inconsistencies, such as the dance, are all part of the director's sense of humour.
Now if only he'd have had something more interesting to say with all that...
I did blink a few times in disbelief after realising that the movie was over.
Then I thought a bit more about it and it may have meant that the rabbits were the only ones who had any honest feelings for Anne, everybody else was using her / being used by her.
Or maybe it's all about the stepping-on-chain? It's like the food chain, except the ones higher up don't eat the lower creatures (on the contrary... *end of dirty joke*), they just step on them.
But I'd still have prefered a different ending (and a shorter movie).
I see that every time I open BBC News.
And that was not truy the focus - this seems to have been all about various creatures trying hard to be desired by a mad monarch.
Well, if I had gone in expecting a game of style and gossip, maybe I'd have appreciated the movie more - after all, I loved Dangerous Liaisons, which is equally deep and meaningful.
But I must have been loking for something more significant, especially after having loved Lobster and having been stimulated to think of all kinds of ideas by it.
Sometimes it is good to know a thing or two about the movie you're about to watch...
It's not a bad movie, just a very unpleasant one.
The "young" segment felt very standard. The credits / ambulance sequence was ghostly and very fast, and matched the later story about Celeste's recurring dream. But after that, everything played out first like a BBC school shooting documentary, then like a teenager-in-adult-world sequence.
We get to hear that Celeste's connection to her sister was deep and significant, then one scene later they are cold with each other and full of drama.
Then grown-up Celeste is a horrible person, and I have never quite noticed so far how screeching Portman's voice is.
It was not bad to have (one more) look into the crazy world of showbiz which turrns artists into crazy people, but there was hardly anything new here.
Still, I may have seen a bit more clearly now how hard it must be to live in a world where everybody thinks they are entitled to a piece of you. Makes one appreciate anonymity a bit more, that feeling of navigating a social environment as if it was just another part of nature, just another background. It must be quite horrible to have the background trying constantly to interact with you. But this was still not unique, and Celeste was still not someone with whom I'd like to spend any second.
So here I am, being mean to a piece of art, which is (a very small) part of the reason why people like Celeste turn into bitches and drama queens. Imagine being not just observed, but judged all the time, coldly and carelessly - must be part of the reason for her breakdown before the concert.
And then again, art survives through judgment, it exposes itself and tries to generate reactions, without which it would be nothing more than our high-school poetry at the bottom of a drawer. And exclusively positive reactions would have pretty much the same effect as no reactions.
So I'm afraid that this negative criticism is nothing but a part of a game.
I understand that this movie involved a lot of work and dedication, but, well, I didn't like it.