Reviews

Again people trying to make a Nancy Meyers film without Nancy Meyers. And they fail tremendously. You can have excellent actors but this film shows that if they fall into the wrong hands they appear to become mediocre actors. This film is not telling a coherent fun, uplifted story. It goes all places. Up and down from somewhere to nowhere and back again. At the start of the film there are some truly funny lines, which made me laugh out loud. I was ready for a fun romantic film. But quickly it all became so tedious, I could not be bothered to keep my focus. Boring, boring dialogues. No cohesive story arc. And the two protagonists stay so flat, so one dimensional. I don't understand why good actors can say yes to such an empty script. The emotions that are on display are also very childlike. We do not see fully developed adults with full personalities and emotions. Joey King is somehow the only one managing to make something out of her scenes and dialogues. But bad editing, bad direction, a script that haphazardly jumps up and down without real substance, is annihilating all her hard work. And then about Nicole Kidman. Yes, she is a recognised, good actress. But she looks frail, vulnerable. Not fit and virile. And yes even as such, a person is able to get into a passionate new love affair. But somehow I do not feel it. And to be honest this has mostly to do with the people behind the camera. An affair between Zac Efron's and Joey King's character would have made more sense. Let's be honest, Kidman was miscast in this film. I just saw the film 'May December', and I think that Julianne Moore, who by the way is older than Nicole Kidman, would have been a better fit for this film. Although I don't think it would have made the film much better. Because the script was lacking, the direction was lacking and the editing was lacking. I was mostly just bored. People need real adult characters with real adult emotions even when you try to create a romantic, at times a slapstick world. The world isn't a Children's Bible, so don't try to cater to those people who think it should be.

N. B. This film is set during Christmas, with Christmas tree and all. My guess this film was meant to premiere during the holiday season in December. Why they decided to put it out there now, in summer?

After seeing this documentary I understand why this woman is such a huge world star. She out performs everyone you can think of. Why? It is all her. She's a real singer/songwriter. Every single fibre of her whole being is in this 3 hour long performance. She is in control, she's sharing her life's emotions and experience while being an excellent singer, musician, composer, lyricist and performer. The concert never gets boring. On the contrary I could keep on watching even after it finished. One of her last songs is the song 'Mastermind' in which she tells us that her success is not an accident. She planned to be loved, to get all the love she is getting now from these millions of fans. As a child no one wanted to play with her and thus she used her musical talent to create this masterplan. It's quite revealing I think, because it feels like she played every single one of us. Even I fell for her, while watching this concert registration. But she's like the piped piper, luring each and everyone of us in. But we don't feel played. Because this woman is real. I have never seen a performer be so confident on stage. So in control. So relaxed. So focused. She's in charge. With her great voice, her smart written lyrics. She's a modern day romantic, a 21st century successor of the Brönte sisters. She's good, really good.

It's 2024 and I just only now have watched In Time. It's a revolutionary tale. It's about our capitalist society. People in the world of 'In Time' pay in life years in stead of money. Working class has like a few days on their wrists. They need to work in factories otherwise they'll die. The rich and powerful live in a different city zone with hundreds to thousands of life years on their wrists. And those at the top have even millions of life years in their safes. It's the same in our society. The more money the more life you'll have. The better quality consumer you can be with better housing, healthcare, educations, holiday houses, cars, quality clothing et cetera. Research shows that rich people live longer and healthier. It's a system. It's a game. That's what 'In Time' is telling us. And the film is right when one of the character says that it's impossible for everyone to be that rich. So those in power keep rising the prices of food, of produce and products. So that always the majority of people will just get buy. But the film also states that there's more than enough money for everyone. And the rich aren't even really happy because they don't have real freedom because they need to go around guarding their precious lives with gates and guards. This film is now 13 years old, and our societies are just the same. I even dare to say that inequality is growing ever since. People fall into the trap believing that 'foreigners' are to blame, that people with a different skin colour are to blame, that drag queens and transgenders are a problem. But who has the power and the money? They go freely and make everyone believe that indeed the other poor and average people who look different are to blame. The end of the film hints on a sequel. I just read that not too long ago Justin Timberlake tried to get a sequel produced. With no succes. Should this film have won many Oscars? No. Is it an important film though? Yes. This film should be shown in schools when kids are being taught about our capitalist society. It's a game we are playing, folks. And we all play along. And we sit and watch human beings become billionaires. Billionaires! All that money taken from societies. From people. And we look at them and do nothing. Unlike the two protagonists in this film, who deserve many sequels to continue their fight. But I think more than one of this type of film will be too much for those in power. Tax the rich!

First and foremost 'Brats' shows that young actors in Hollywood are vulnerable. Andrew McCarthy tells us that the term 'Brat Pack' had a big impact on some of the young artists' minds, who were part of this pack. Understandbly as a young person you want to be taken seriously and when a journalist from a renowned newspaper all of a sudden calls you a brat, this can be hurtful and even traumatic for young sensitive artists. The art of an actor is to be sensitive so they can transcribe thoughts, feelings and emotions via their whole being, onto the screen or onto a stage. I very much also understand the journalist being proud of himself with this genius terminology 'Brat Pack'. Where it went wrong was with the guidance from agents and production companies who should have helped these young professionals. It is probably one of the sides of Hollywood that is being ignored: the lack of guidance, the lack of help to understand and define everything that is happening around them and to help them explain and help them to deal with all the turmoil that comes with becoming famous and successful in Hollywood. It sounds to me that the young actors were left tending to themselves on how to deal with all of this. So it is not where the journalist went wrong, but where the whole Hollywood industry failed them. Hollywood as an industry failed them, it failed to be there for their money making actors. Especially when teenagers and young adults are involved. But also when people are adults and experience a sudden succes and fame in Hollywood, there should be good professional help and guidance for a long period of time. I think it would prevent many addictions, many depressions and many stressful, negative feelings. I think this is a subject that should have been talked about, in this documentary. But it shows that even now, as middle aged people, these actors still need to figure out for themselves how to deal with these kinds of phenomenons. So, of course they should have been proud being called the Brat Pack. All of a sudden they were put on the same pedestal as the original Rat Pack. The journalist could have called them Rat Pack 2.0.. But let's face it: Brat Pack is a much better, literary title. It is a badge of honour. And of course they were seen as Brats, when all of a sudden these young actors are making money as never seen before in Hollywood, looking at young actors. And the older generation probably would have also called them Brats, out of jealousy and spite. But when you're in your early 20's without lots of life experience, this could prove to be too difficult to put into context. But everyone around the world wanted to be a Brat like them, have succes like them, be charismatic and communicatively able like them and yes to party like them and be respected like them. Because let's face it: being given such a huge badge of honour, being called the Brat Pack in direct reference to the influential Rat Pack, is a testimony to the succes and influence of these young people right there and then in the 1980's. It is a sign of huge respect, there just weren't professionals around these young people to explain this to them.

Who remembers 'Crash'? The year 'Revenge of the Sith' was rewarded an Oscar for best make-up. 'Crash' won best film ... why on earth can a sci-fi film not be nominated for best film? I'm watching the Star Wars films in chronological order. And after 'Revenge of the Sith' I'll be watching 'Solo' and then. 'Rogue One' and then continue with 'Episode IV' etc. Alone for the last 40 minutes this third episode deserves to get the Best Film Oscar ... from beginning to end this film is such a cinematic extraordinary jewel ... but also in a literary way ... this is Shakespeare, this is Greek Mythology, this is in the tradition of the Great Hollywood Film Spectacles, this is on par with a great dramatic theatrical Opera ... so yes lots of green screen but what extraordinary world could be created because of this? The rhythm of the backgrounds in sync with the music and the movements of the choreographed actors together with the editing. This is a Masterpiece. Or with an expensive German word: a true 'Gesamtkunstwerk'. Not just for sci-fi lovers. This is great cinema. The first two movies were good also but not like this one. It's a shame this was not lauded with the biggest Awards possible ... The Academy should create an Oscar for films that in hindsight should have gotten one. Beautiful, Masterly, impressive. Go watch this one.

I avoided seeing this film for a long time. I love for example 'Io Sono L'Amore' ('I am Love) by Luca Guadagnino, which has quite some Lady Chatterley's Lover theme going on. That film is perfection. I remember also seeing a kitschy film version of Lady Chatterley's Lover from like the 1970's which didn't work for me at all. But this 2022 version hits all the right spots. It is so much more than about the eroticism, it is about class society, industrialisation, a ruling class exploiting the classes below them and treating them like cattle, women being used as vessels to produce an heir, the disdain of the upper class for all the other classes below them. The book itself created a big scandal. It had to be produced in Florence, Italy and it could not be sold in bookshops. It was covered in a neutral cover and you had to order it. Anyway, this film is directed by a woman, the music is by a female composer and many other key positions were executed by women. Someone in here wrote in a review that the scene where they dance naked in the rain wasn't erotic. On the contrary. It was very erotic, and beautifully done at the same time. To be honest some scenes were almost soft porn. But the actors know how to make it about emotions and feelings and not about carnal lust. The love making scenes are not designed to arouse the audience, but to make them feel passion and desire. But, we are a 21st century audience, for us to like feel a bit of a 'oh la la' sensation we need to be pushed a little bit more than in the past. Most of us are used to getting and seeing shocking images or erotic arousing content, we are used to nudity and pornography being omnipresent. So the director needed to push the envelope a bit. This film is not a pornographic film though. But a modern general audience is used to so much more than they were used to in the past. And I was pleasantly surprised to see that the actors went full frontal. Because I think nudity isn't something bad or to be ashamed of. And above all it fits the romantic ideas in this film, being connected to nature, shedding of all your clothes and balast and being cleansed by nature, by the rain. And because I think it is a good antidote for the far right, extreme right, fascist forces which are trying to root into our modern societies. This film is a true romantic story, with beautiful intimacy of two young lovers, finding their true nature with each other, across class borders. The reviewer who said the rain scene wasn't erotic also said this film is a suburban adaptation of the book and that the Oliver character was not hairy, masculine or tough. Equaling the smooth skinned Oliver character to being effeminate. When you say this after seeing this film, you are so not getting the overall meaning of this story. Not sure who he or she saw but I saw a 'real man', an educated man with self pride and with agency. Calling this film suburban is hautain, it's snobbery, and doesn't show much real insight from the reviewer. I am glad I watched the film. Passionate, well paced, beautifully acted. A film with many layers and social critique. And most of all a story told and made by many women. Beautiful, moving, and hopeful. NB. I really love the costuming in this film. On par with the time around and after the First World War. Especially the upperclass women became more independent, more 'masculine' so you want, meaning more freedom, driving cars, being independent and more free. Just like how the upper-class started traveling the world as tourists early on for the masses to follow. It were also the upper-class women who had the means to take the risk of being more independent, more free. And you see this very well in this film. Connie's sister driving the car, supporting her sister but she is also sensitive still for the consequences of her actions on conservative society. And as another side-note (I am trying to type this review as quickly as possible) we see that the lower classes are accepting of the love story between the two lovers, they respect Connie and Oliver because they are honest and open. It is the upper-class friends who we see talking bad about it and who are even ignoring Connie.

FIRST: DO ME A FAVOUR.... click on the profile names of the one star reviews telling us this is oh so bad. Many of those have just ONE REVIEW, and that is for this series! So it is safe to presume that these are people with an agenda. An Anti-Woke agenda.... Always click on profiel names to see if they are honest and true enthusiasts, reviewing a film or series out of passion, going back years of reviewing, here on IMDB. If you see profiles with just reviewing one or a few productions on the past like year then mostly they are here to write down negative (or positive for that matter) reviews because a production doesn't agree with their world views, or their politics. I didn't click all profile names of the reviewers here, but the first 5 bad ones, all had ONE REVIEW.... and that's the review for 'And Just Like That'. It is safe to say that these are extreme right conservatives who don't want others to exist, who are anti non-binary people, who are anti homosexual people, relationships, who are anti interracial relationships et cetera. They want to annihilate everyone who is not just like their small minded selves. I am telling you, this is really good.... all the characters, the story lines, the twists.... I see a production made by people who know and who love what they are doing... real emotions, real characters... with a bit of romance and fairytale when looking at fashion and the romanticised life in NY.... but they do the fashion so so good.... and we all fall in love with NY.... what Woody Allen started with his love songs on New York... Sex and the City and now 'And Just like that' continu this view... I say this is even better than Sex and the City because we see so much more real people, more diversity, more real life people.... and no, it is not woke... it is like life around me.... I hope on many more seasons.... and ideally this goes on for like another 10 years.... let's grow old together....

Beautiful heartfelt, well acted and well directed film! The actors are exceptional to be honest. I'm sure the director had them practice and do a murder weekend or something before they started actually filming. The group of friends feel so real, the actors are one by one giving such good performances. The script naturally is very well written also giving the actors real people with rounded in depth personalities to play. I genuinely enjoyed this. And of course this calls for a sequel. Really, I insist. With such a superb cast it has to happen. And besides this I really am looking forward to see all the individual actors in other productions. Loved it, go see this film.

This film is many things but a skillful film it is not. The actors are good but they do not get space to carry the story, also not Elise Schaap who is playing the protagonist. Antoinette Beumer, the director, is a big name in film and tv in The Netherlands. She is also a sister of Dutch actor in Hollywood: Famke Janssen. This film is a hot mess. It does not have vision and it has no solid soulful, artistic structure. You can see that Elise Schaap and Pierre Bokma are really delivering as good actors but the director is letting this whole project down. The film is based on Antoinette Beumer's own book with the same title. A story in a book is built on words and sentences. Film is first and foremost a visual language where language and music also play an important role. I don't know what it is with Dutch filmmakers. Sometimes you think: 'Yes, now we are going places!' with a tv-series like 'Oogappels' or even with a series like 'Gooische Vrouwen' (coincidentally both tv-series have Wil Koopman at the creative steering wheel) and often, like in this case, you think: 'Oh, we are stuck in the bad part of the 1980's,' film wise. Or you think: 'This is a complete newbie, still a student, trying to make his or her first film.' I really do not understand how this always can happen within the Dutch film industry. Perhaps Antoinette Beumer is too influential and no one is giving her true honest feedback? I mean, the editing is also so bad: the film drags on and on. It doesn't have speed but it also lacks the cool intentional slowness a really well made film can have. The exhibition of the characters and story is also an unclear mess. As a director you need to have a vision with a clear visual language, with clear visual structural ideas. Here you see some use of metaphors which in fact are a bit childlike, it is not the language of a seasoned visual artist. And really, as a film director you need to be a visual artist and not just the captain on board of a ship. Directing is so much more than telling others what to do. And much more than just coming up with a few metaphors and some ideas without real structural roots. Without a real artistic, idiosyncratic language. I also don't understand why this film was the opening film of the Dutch Film Festival, when the film premiered. I mean, why? The film is not delivering. The actors do their best but the script, the directing, the editing, the soundscapes, it all is underperforming, to say the least. It is a mess. Perhaps some other director could re-edit this film? Make something out of it with real soul? Perhaps very abstract and artistic or otherwise, with some unused footage from the cutting room floor, a real coherent commercial film? Some of the language used, the dialogues between doctors and patients, or other medical professionals, it is so archaic, so not in touch with real life. The dialogues and use of language are often really theatrical and old fashioned. And what's up with the nudeness? I am not a prude, the 'Nymphomaniac' films are excellent for example. But here, the revealing of certain body parts feel so much like a Dutch film from the 1970's or 1980's, many of those films used nudeness in a non-functional way. Here in this film it is also superfluous. This film gets just 4 stars from me. (If you watch 'Faithfully Yours', (2022) by Dutch director André van Duren then you can see the opposite: a skillful, beautifully directed, photographed and acted film)

This series is almost unwatchable.... it is sad really because the story is based on real life. On the memoires of Tembi Locke and her life with Saro Gullo (Lino in the film). The dialogues are really bad, I really am very sorry to say this. I really wanted to like it so much. But three episodes in and I really have to force myself to continue watching it. This is an expensively produced Hallmark production, although it has nothing to do with Hallmark. And often a Hallmark production is very watchable. This is just too irritatingly cringy at times. The dialogues are often too childlike, and the characters are staying one dimensional. The actors playing Lino's parents, Lucia Sardo and Paride Bennasai are the real show stealers until episode three. Their scenes in their Sicilian home are really good. Eugenio Mastandrea, who plays Lino is a very good actor. His talent is wasted in this production. And I am sorry to say that Zoe Saldana is not convincing me. She stays too flat, too timid. There is honestly something weird going on with the ratings of this series. Here on IMDB it gets a 7.9 and in Rotten Tomatoes it is getting 92% of the professional reviewers and 86% from the audience.... I mean Oscar winning films get these scores. And 'From Scratch' really isn't of that level. So what is going on? The thing is I almost feel bad about reviewing this not so positively because the story is about real people, real lives. But it is really not good enough. I am sorry. It is well produced though and it looks lush. Ah... for a while I turned on the Italian dubbing in Netflix, then it becomes a bit better. But, no. (PS. Click on the names of some of the extreme high rating reviewers.... not all, but many of them reviewed just a handful of films and all of them just in the past couple of years... I am not saying something fishy is going on with these reviews but, it is really too highly rated)

Ursina Lardi is a phenomenal actress, she portrays Alice... This story is about her husband finally following his true identity... as it goes, society often forces people to hide their true selves, and even force them to push it away. Frank has been married to Alice for 20 years... he has always had feelings for men but he admits he loved Alice and he loves the family they created... but the time came for him to not be 'sensible' anymore.... he doesn't want to follow societal rules anymore but he needs to be who he is.... Where most films with this subject tend to focus on the struggle of the man.... here we see the struggle it is for Alice.... She is literally paralysed by hurt... also the children are affected by this.... it is not easy on neither of the members of this nice family... if Frank would continue his life with his wife and children he would make Alice happy but he would sacrifice himself .... if he leaves he sacrifices Alice and will hurt her.... there's no winner either way... It is a joy to watch Ursina Lardi.... she portrays an intelligent woman who is willing to do a lot to keep her marriage together... she doesn't judge her husband for who he is but for what he is doing to her, the traumatic change he is forcefully creating.... She starts to questions everything about her marriage with Frank and wonders if her whole life with him has been a lie.... Nice, heartfelt film.

If you are able to consume a low budget film with not the best sound, where they probably filmed in real time during a cruise and probably didn't have hours to take and retake and retake and retake scenes to get the best acting performances, they probably also didn't have much time to rehearse.... then this is really a remarkable feature.... all shot on an iPhone 6S (so they said in the opening titles (or was it the closing titles?).... During the film you really get invested in the two characters... especially Ian Dick (yes that is really his name :-D ).... creates a character you really feel.... the connection between the two men you feel also.... then it is almost like you are watching something filmed in real life (which in fact is true) and not a produced slick film.... the editing is really good also... one scene they had to use subtitles because they weren't using microphones and the sound of water was too loud.... All in all a lovely sweet film with two endearing GOOD actors who know to translates emotions well to us viewers.... Lovely...

Wow... impressive film... written and directed by Grant Scicluna.... how is this man not like making huge films in Hollywood by now? I watched this film in 2023, while it is from 2015.... It is a beautiful love story really, eventually. Against the background of a social drama and murder mystery... it shows uff how childhood isn't always this sunny happy go lucky existence. Childhood can be unfair. It can be traumatic and profoundly harmful. Your neighbours aren't always your friends. Worse, they can abuse you and use you to hide their own wrongdoings or shortcomings. But the protagonist, excellently portrayed by Reef Island (why this man isn't a big superstar of an actor already is beyond my comprehension) is strong, resilient and determined to literally get to the bottom of it all... I got angry a lot at the abusive people and I cried and felt a lot for the young guys finding love and support with each other. Superb film.... Class A.

Wow... really a hidden gem, this film.... I bumped into it by accident, here in 2023... while the film is from 2009. Eric Debets carries the film with his subtle sensitive acting... but I have to say that the majority of the other roles are excellent also... Michael Arrington and Diarra Kilpatrick are hitting a homerun.... we get to see Hollywood for how it is. Not a glamorous well lit, beautifully filtered town.... but the concrete, palm tree-ed, car filled town it really is.... but with a focus on the people who inhabit this town full of actors and other poor people hoping to get a shot in this hard world of industrial cinema. Friends are important, human relations are important.... but just as important is the city in which these human connections exist... Hollywood is made out of cheap concrete, polluting cars, lots of underpaid people looking for better lives. Paris in this sense has more to offer. The main character Jerôme has a small life also in Paris, with a tiny apartment, but the city itself is more breathable, it is walkable, and more human. I really loved this film. Again, Eric Debets really takes you with him with his subtle, calm, sensitive acting. He would have been very good also in silent movies. A good actor knows how to express emotions without words, how to be a mime artist really. With an even bigger budget this could have become a more mainstream film, like you had the Australian film 'The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert' from 1994, made 15 years prior to Hollywood, je t'aime. They should have made a second part: Paris je t'aime where Norma and and Kaleesha would have visited Paris, and live in it like forever? The actors were perfectly cast: Norma, Kaleesha and Jerôme felt real. I'm missing them already :-D. Lovely film ...

Really a beautiful love story.... Kudo's for Sacha Weingarten and Julien Lickert.... they play really believable characters... the mythical context is a really nice poetic context writer and director Tor Iben gives to the whole story... I love the dreamlike state at times.... I might be wrong but I feel some inspiration from Marco Berger's films? Although Tor Iben has a feel for mythicism, for a fairytale like world with a connection to ancient old stories told for centuries... in this case the great Greek Myths... Both Sacha Weingarten and Julien Lickert portray two very believable men with deep complex emotions. It never becomes corny and never too porny ... it's honest and true... Perhaps they could have made the film a bit longer.... a bit more expansion on some parts of the script. The film is now a bit longer than one hour. I understand the budget was probably tight but I think with a bit more script the film could have become a 1,5 to 2 hour feature film... If you like Marco Berger's films I am sure you will appreciate Orpheus' Song also... Again: perfectly cast!

I am trying to watch this but ufff... first off: this script is overly dramatic, every character is hysterically crazy.., everyone, from Kevin's sister, to Dana's niece and husband, the neighbors... everyone is suspicious of each other .... everyone travelled over from some B-movie into this ...Malori Johnson isn't giving much but one type of stare... From episode one, from since she met the Kevin character, but also already her conversation with her niece and her husband ... an empty stare all the time.... and also when she switches times she is not behaving like a 21st century woman who is educated and feels free and independent... What's going on here? Bad direction? Bad actors? I mean, most of the characters are soap opera style over the top ... While the subject is such an important one to tell and I am normally into all types of time travel stories. I am not just getting irritated and angry at the white characters who are overtly racist (which is a good thing to get irritated about) but I am getting pulled from this screen-world, back to reality because the actors are acting so grotesque or like the Dana character so static, that I am feeling irritated just by the bad acting, and that script, the suspicious hysteria all the time... you'd think this is a story about some mass psychosis or some virus in the air that makes people go crazy ... and the Dana's mother character.... she's from the twentieth century, right? Stuck there in time for over 12 years? But she is behaving like she is from the 19th century, born and raised. Why? It is all these details not matching up... I am at episode 3... I'll try to finish it, but man...

This is a well produced series... it is slow paced. It probably would have worked much better in an 8 million euro 3 hour film in stead of the 8 million euro 8 part series which it is now.... The sets are beautiful and believable. Lynn van Rooyen as Luz is excellent, I bet we will hear from her more in international productions.... the overall cast is quite good. As this first season ends on a cliffhanger, it means that for the viewer the ending is a bit disappointing.... loose strings are not getting tied for us, apparently we need to wait for more information about the who, the what and the why of Arcadia and the main forces pulling the strings in that society.... the storyline overall is quite okay although at points it becomes really too slow. As said, a 3 hour film probably would have given the whole production a bit more umpf.... Arcadia is still worth your while though, although a bit unsatisfying at times. It is very different from the British production Years and Years, which also is about a dystopian society, but within our current time. Years and Years though, is much more rooted in real people, real relationships and it has a real dynamic way of telling a real story with real ideas, real people.... here the ideas are a little bit more philosophical and the characters are more one- (and a half) dimensional.... Though, again: well produced, gorgeous sets and good actors... For season 2 they need to ask Russel T. Davies (the man who wrote Years and Years) for some feedback.

What to say? I didn't see the finale coming... I was sobbing towards the end.... Gorgeous film really.... you go along with the hyperactive and chaotic and lost Kate, excellently played by Emilia Clark... you get to learn about her life her parents, her job, her home situation, the man she falls in love with, her friends, her sister. Slowly, bit by bit the story unfolds... we get invested in all these characters and story lines, with Kate in the middle... her sweet new love, her immigrant mother and father, the hidden relationship of her sister and the tensious relationship she has with all of them... slowly we learn more about Kate's childhood and that it is no coincidence she falls in love with Tom Webster. Skillfully writen script by Emma Thomson and Greg Wise. The big finale overwhelmed me... I didn't see it coming... but when I told my mother to watch this film she said she saw it coming at this and that point in the film... beautiful... really beautiful. Well done Emma Thompson and Greg Wise! Write some more scripts! You are so so good at it. And all the actors involved: they are all delivering. Beautiful.