Bloodless Coup

Gotta say I agree about the overflowing direction; not a whole lot of surprises in this movie. I certainly do like the theme, that some things you can't change but through creativity you can find a way to live with them. And I guess I could as easily ask if McAvoy's a lead. It seems all of the characters suffer from the overemphasis of the "deafening clacking," as you put it.

I'm certainly no enemy of slow paced movies, but this one began so slowly that it had a feeling of being lost. Are we there yet, have we reached the actual story, is this what we're supposed to be paying attention to now? And while I appreciated the sweeping effect of the scene at Dunkirk, I have to ask if that was worth it for only about ten minutes. I can't argue the quality of the performances, but I do question if they were emphasized enough to justify lead role awards?

I could see McAvoy as a lead. I mean there is a whole section of the movie about him, and he's in it throughout. I could also see Briony as a lead - though not any of the actresses that play her, since they are each only playing part of her. Like you I really think Knightley is more supporting, but I won't begrudge her a nomination if she gets it. I liked her a lot.

And honestly, as much praise as the Dunkirk shot has received I had kind of a "meh" reaction to it. Technically impressive? You betcha. But I really didn't see it adding much to the plot or our understanding of anything going on with the characters. It was like - let's swoop this way, then around, okay now one of our trio is in frame again so when can swoop this way, then turn, and another part of the trio is there, so we can follow him. Put another way, it screamed "look what I can do!". I just think the direction was too heavy handed. It was like he longed to be making Julie Taymor or Michael Bay movies.

Oh, and I totally disagree with your read of the theme. She didn't find a way to live with her actions. They haunted her her whole life. She found a way to make a minor amends, and say "well at least I did X".

much like possession, a similar quasi-morality tale taking place in syncopated eras and largely an inward-searching sort of narrative, i am actively avoiding atonement. i liked the book too much, and it is, quintessentially, a book, as to which i need see no attempt to know already that adaptation will fail in critical respects. and i feel even more strongly about atonement's inadaptability than i did about possession, as well as believing that atonement is a better book, so my conviction is far stronger as to the newer one of those two. and nothing in either of your discussions of the movie lead me to reconsider my choice. :-)

Good, you shouldn't, and after watching it I definitely thought - I bet it was better on the page.