The actor's portrayal is fairly decent, Lawrence brings it, though Brad just wings it, but this isn't the story you yell up to your 93 year old Mom "Say Mom!!do you remember Brad and Jenn from Silver Linings? WOW!! Let's go watch them again but THIS TIME--they rape the environment, abuse and kill workers, abuse and finally kill "each other", one by proxy via panther (Selena's animal counterpart), the other as a result of suicide --- It's a real laugh riot!!!". Nope. Wrong flick. Sorry Ma.
This is not a movie for the robots and graphic comic crowd, which is why the reviews, every one here so far, lean for the most part, towards literacy, whether intrigued or disappointed. But that doesn't mean the film couldn't have been written better for those with artistic sensibilities. And edited with something other than Serena's borrowed hatchet. If scenes were left on the cutting room floor because of airplane noise, there are sound editors that can fix a lot of that. Where the (*&)(& were they?
And as Lawrence reviewed and thought this film worth making, she was overtaken in her enthusiasm by rewrites leaving out some key points that should have overshadowed the lush photography, and treacly but sometimes fetching musical score she never got to hear till post production. She got ripped off by further and further rewrites that watered down the effects of her character's eventual madness.
Kyle's original treatment had Selena murdering Pemberton for daring to support his bastard child. And the original screenplay has Serena dying at 70 at the hand of Pemberton's bastard son--in the jungle--where she has lived alone for forty years, "imprisoned" as a voluntary exile, longing for the man she murdered.
If you were a film school instructor, and you brought this version of the film to show to class, the teach would say something positive like "I'm glad you tried this."
It reminds me of just the kind of films that got screenwriters blackballed for being Commies in the late forties and fifties, it's "anti-capitalism" in the forties and fifties tradition that anything against business labeled you red. And what is Pemberton's fatal flaw besides raping the environment?--he was balling his help and producing bastards kind of speaks for itself.
And Lawrence's post partum insanity, the frustration behind her failed expectations, IS motivation to turn into a nut-case, it is the SECOND TIME with the loss of her child, that she has lost relatives, first her siblings in a fire calling out for her help, then her child, whose fragility she didn't "listen" for. That is motivation for madness that many missed and the reason she "joins them" so graphically, finally, in the film's final moments. Now all you have to add is the discovery of Pemberton's support, all along, of his bastard kid, and the motivation for insane jealousy and retaliation is underscored.
The only thing missing was, if Serena was such a strong character, I would have preferred she chase down the mother of Pemberton's child and fight her with the same level of strength she showed doing "man's work" in the lumber camp. It's a cheap shot to send a henchman immediately, even though she tags along.
I'd rather a fight ensues in which Serena leaves Pemberton's mistress strangled, left for dead, only to revive. THEN Serena, discovering she's still alive, is now justified in sending a more skillful killer. As it is, it is Pemberton that wrings Serena's neck maddened by her attempt to annihilate his son and his former mistress.
Hey if doing rewrites, I have a right to give it a shot too.
So if the film is strictly 1940's noir, prepare yourself by reviewing films like "The Strange Loves of Martha Ivers" (1946) before you watch this film. It helps.
I'm surprised nobody thought to film this movie in black and white. It becomes a different movie. Not better, but more understandable in context. No wonder Lawrence is compared to Barbara Stanwyck, who died the year she was born. There's a plot for you, reincarnation. But Lawrence's A game is much higher imho. She's got an Oscar to prove it.
Some sex scenes with Lawrence in the classic black widow position came through loud and clear, but really with just a bit of imagination I actually know what sex looks like. In one of the scenes however, and I'll leave it to you to figure which one, if Pemberton is actually correctly "aligned", somebody is anatomically impossibly configured. i only mention it because, it takes you out of the movie. That's a no no. That's about as rated G as I can get on that one, 'nuff said.
BUT--can anyone tell me why the other 5 scenes propel the story, besides pillow talk without the talk? If you're saying the love changes when the sex stops, is that a necessary clue to the plot, given all the rest?
So. Do you think this movie is going to go on to make back its money on DVD and on demand sales? Possible, but unless you're a Lawrence fan trying to complete a collection, what part of "don't think so" is not understood, however worth one viewing.
And the film itself?
Well.
"I'm glad you tried this."
This is not a movie for the robots and graphic comic crowd, which is why the reviews, every one here so far, lean for the most part, towards literacy, whether intrigued or disappointed. But that doesn't mean the film couldn't have been written better for those with artistic sensibilities. And edited with something other than Serena's borrowed hatchet. If scenes were left on the cutting room floor because of airplane noise, there are sound editors that can fix a lot of that. Where the (*&)(& were they?
And as Lawrence reviewed and thought this film worth making, she was overtaken in her enthusiasm by rewrites leaving out some key points that should have overshadowed the lush photography, and treacly but sometimes fetching musical score she never got to hear till post production. She got ripped off by further and further rewrites that watered down the effects of her character's eventual madness.
Kyle's original treatment had Selena murdering Pemberton for daring to support his bastard child. And the original screenplay has Serena dying at 70 at the hand of Pemberton's bastard son--in the jungle--where she has lived alone for forty years, "imprisoned" as a voluntary exile, longing for the man she murdered.
If you were a film school instructor, and you brought this version of the film to show to class, the teach would say something positive like "I'm glad you tried this."
It reminds me of just the kind of films that got screenwriters blackballed for being Commies in the late forties and fifties, it's "anti-capitalism" in the forties and fifties tradition that anything against business labeled you red. And what is Pemberton's fatal flaw besides raping the environment?--he was balling his help and producing bastards kind of speaks for itself.
And Lawrence's post partum insanity, the frustration behind her failed expectations, IS motivation to turn into a nut-case, it is the SECOND TIME with the loss of her child, that she has lost relatives, first her siblings in a fire calling out for her help, then her child, whose fragility she didn't "listen" for. That is motivation for madness that many missed and the reason she "joins them" so graphically, finally, in the film's final moments. Now all you have to add is the discovery of Pemberton's support, all along, of his bastard kid, and the motivation for insane jealousy and retaliation is underscored.
The only thing missing was, if Serena was such a strong character, I would have preferred she chase down the mother of Pemberton's child and fight her with the same level of strength she showed doing "man's work" in the lumber camp. It's a cheap shot to send a henchman immediately, even though she tags along.
I'd rather a fight ensues in which Serena leaves Pemberton's mistress strangled, left for dead, only to revive. THEN Serena, discovering she's still alive, is now justified in sending a more skillful killer. As it is, it is Pemberton that wrings Serena's neck maddened by her attempt to annihilate his son and his former mistress.
Hey if doing rewrites, I have a right to give it a shot too.
So if the film is strictly 1940's noir, prepare yourself by reviewing films like "The Strange Loves of Martha Ivers" (1946) before you watch this film. It helps.
I'm surprised nobody thought to film this movie in black and white. It becomes a different movie. Not better, but more understandable in context. No wonder Lawrence is compared to Barbara Stanwyck, who died the year she was born. There's a plot for you, reincarnation. But Lawrence's A game is much higher imho. She's got an Oscar to prove it.
Some sex scenes with Lawrence in the classic black widow position came through loud and clear, but really with just a bit of imagination I actually know what sex looks like. In one of the scenes however, and I'll leave it to you to figure which one, if Pemberton is actually correctly "aligned", somebody is anatomically impossibly configured. i only mention it because, it takes you out of the movie. That's a no no. That's about as rated G as I can get on that one, 'nuff said.
BUT--can anyone tell me why the other 5 scenes propel the story, besides pillow talk without the talk? If you're saying the love changes when the sex stops, is that a necessary clue to the plot, given all the rest?
So. Do you think this movie is going to go on to make back its money on DVD and on demand sales? Possible, but unless you're a Lawrence fan trying to complete a collection, what part of "don't think so" is not understood, however worth one viewing.
And the film itself?
Well.
"I'm glad you tried this."