Posted: 1/16/16 at 10:33pm
Saw it tonight. I loved it but did want to turn up the brightness but this was in a theater and they don't let you do that (yet).
Posted: 1/16/16 at 10:59pm
It really was heartbreaking in places, add me to the list that loved it.
Posted: 1/17/16 at 1:57am
ArtMan said: "Saw this yesterday. I was more impressed with the design and costumes. It was nearly flawless. The story didn't do anything for me. Although well acted, I didn't buy into this great love and the life choices that were made as a result. The movie was slow, but felt rushed at the same time. If that makes sense?
It does make sense, and I agree. I didn't really buy their relationship, either. I really wanted Alison Bechdel to step in and start mocking it ("It's like a 1950s lesbian pulp novel!"
.
Updated On: 1/17/16 at 01:57 AM
Posted: 1/17/16 at 10:22am
She would never, ever make fun of this or the novel.
Posted: 1/20/16 at 10:27am
I liked a lot about the film, but unfortunately there was a lot of audience stupidity going on at the screening I attended -- a stupid old woman equipped with a plastic bag full of individually plastic-wrapped plastic bags made more noise than you can possibly imagine, and then there was the stupid younger woman who kept making snotty little comments -- "Sluts!" when Carol and Therese go on the road trip, and then "Ooooooh BAD GIRLS!!" during the love scene. Kind of made it hard to concentrate.
Posted: 1/20/16 at 10:53am
Behavior like that is why I rarely go to the movies anymore. They make poor theater etiquette seem quaint.
Posted: 1/20/16 at 11:09am
I heard snickers and chuckles at the crowded theater I saw it in, generally during anything sexy, and they were coming from women in the audience.
Posted: 1/20/16 at 11:39am
Just saw it (on a kind of double bill with Star Wars) and loved every minute of it.
Didn't find it cold or flat at all.
At ALL.
Posted: 1/20/16 at 4:45pm
Cate has enormous facial features compared to every other man and woman in this film. Throughout the entire thing she made me think of Ryan Landry. And occasionally Faye Dunaway as Joan Crawford. And I say this with respect for all four of them.
Posted: 1/22/16 at 3:24pm
(The colours are muted on purpose, I get that, but I agree with Namo that I wanted to turn up the saturation).
I saw this for a second time with my mom, after re-reading the novel. I think Phyllis Nagy well deserves her nomination--the changes made for the film (the gloves, Therese being a photographer, etc) all make so much more sense. It's a brilliant, gorgeous and moving film (my mom loved it, for the record--there were not many people in the theatre otherwise except a few older women in couples and a young couple all, I will be presumptuous and say, lesbians).
What really annoys me about all of the talk about the lack of director and movie Oscar noms is the :"Well it's beautifully shot, but would anyone care if they were a straight couple" take. Ummm??? (and then there's Tarantino with his comment about Haynes being very good at dressing up dolls--does that mean all that Tarantino does is play with GI Joes?)
Posted: 1/22/16 at 5:37pm
Just saw it Wednesday and loved it. I definitely shed some tears.
Posted: 1/23/16 at 9:51pm
I haven't seen it yet, but I did like John Waters' comment on it: "Maybe the only way to be transgressive these days is to be scrupulously tasteful."
On Marc Maron's podcast, Haynes stated that his next film will be a companion piece to HUGO. He makes such fine adult films, I kind of hope it doesn't happen.
Posted: 1/24/16 at 2:25am
I found it incredibly moving - a film that doesn't try to look like an enormous blockbuster. While some may find the first half slow, I thought it was fantastic in developing the characters. They felt very human - which I often don't find when going to the movies. As for the "cold" comments, I can see how one might think that. Carol is not particularly likable, and Therese is a interior character that doesn't exude warmth. However, the film itself is a wonderful thing - made all the better by the restraint it shows. I have had great luck in movies this week - this and "The Danish Girl" were both superb.
Posted: 1/24/16 at 11:48pm
I really loved it. But it's a very restrained movie. Not crazy theaterics or dramatic moments. But it's beautiful, and I loved the performances.
Those that have read the book, and now I want to, what does the name "Price of Salt" mean?
Posted: 1/25/16 at 8:57am
I loved it. Completely. It's a film I will own as soon as I can. It's just beautiful. While others found it a bit melodramatic, I loved the final shot. The realization on Carol's face gave me chills.
I can't believe I have never read the book.
Posted: 1/25/16 at 10:30am
Now reading the book I can see more clearly what Blanchett was doing with the role. But I still think the script let her down. I should see the movie again and give it another chance. But I find Carol to be a far more interesting, thoughtful, articulate, caring and intriguing character in the book; a woman less self-consumed and far worthier of Therese's devotion. In the movie, it felt - to me, it goes without saying - start to finish like an ill-fated infatuation.
Updated On: 1/25/16 at 10:30 AM
Posted: 1/25/16 at 1:03pm
MILD SPOILER. One of my favorite aspects of the story is the approach to Carol's emotional resolution in the ending. Rather than played as a woman desperate at any cost to make this relationship happen, Blanchett makes her persuasive case, accepts Therese's decision, painful as it is, and then gets on with both her evening and her life. One of the adult and unsentimental aspects of that fadeout: Carol is enjoying herself, invested in her company for the evening, not forlorn in her dejection, curled up in a ball. When Therese spots her, Carol's never more sure of herself and her own presence. She's never been more attractive in the story, and it's a testament to this woman's survival skills that she is so together on the cusp of their reunion. What's more attractive than someone that confident? If anything, it's the swooniest moment in the film, because Carol is at the top of her game.
Posted: 1/25/16 at 2:44pm
henrikegerman said: "Now reading the book I can see more clearly what Blanchett was doing with the role. But I still think the script let her down. I should see the movie again and give it another chance. But I find Carol to be a far more interesting, thoughtful, articulate, caring and intriguing character in the book; a woman less self-consumed and far worthier of Therese's devotion. In the movie, it felt - to me, it goes without saying - start to finish like an ill-fated infatuation.
"
Is that because she is less defined in the novel? She is only seen through Therese's eyes, so it is easier to idolize her. Maybe the film should have done that too, but I actually liked all if the changes made (ie the use of the gloves)
Posted: 1/25/16 at 10:35pm
I don't think so at all, EricMontreal. I find Carol much more defined in the novel. We learn a great deal about her from both the exposition, Therese's impressions of her, but also from their dialogue. Their many intriguing discussions about each other, love, being in love, youth, art, work, passions, and the people in their lives - Abby, Harge, and Richard.
Posted: 3/5/16 at 6:14am
That had me laughing out loud
.jpg?format=auto&width=300)
