Can you say "awards bait"? I finally watched Lone Scherfig's much-lauded film from last year, and no wonder it was so widely praised. Pretty people learn life lessons from only marginally less pretty people in a period piece with great costumes, a strong but conventional script, and a bright but still bait-y score? How could that go wrong with awards givers? I don't mean to belittle the film's achievements. It's a very good movie, and I'm rather surprised Ms. Scherfig didn't catch on as an Oscar nominee herself (though of course there've been extremely few women awarded nominations - only 4, including this year's winner). But as well as being of a high quality, it's also rather conventional.
There's not a single thing about it that I didn't like. It's strong across the board. If I had to pick out a favorite thing though, it'd have to be the acting (though the directing, costumes, score, the way it's shot - it's all strong). There's not a single weak or middling turn in the film. Everyone is good. And several of the actors are very good. Rosamund Pike and Olivia Williams would be my favorites from among the supporting players, but again, everyone is good. And of course the lead, Sally Sparrow (err, Carey Mulligan), is excellent. Can't wait to see her in more films.
If I had any problems with it they'd be matters of casting. Mulligan doesn't look or act like she's a teenager in the 1960s. She's excellent, but if they were going for someone who could capture the veracity of a sixteen year-old, sorry, I'm not buying that. And I really don't know why they felt compelled to cast an American (Peter Sarsgaard) opposite her. It's not that he's bad, but that casting too seemed a touch off. But regardless of any minor flaws or misses, on the whole this was a very well-done film, and I'm surprised it fell out of the discussion as something that could win Best Picture so quickly.
Posted by armand at April 9, 2010 12:28 PM | TrackBack | Posted to Movies