I just saw "Rachel Getting Married" and...

[MTVMANN]

Posted: 3/10/09 at 4:40pm

I just saw "Rachel Getting Married" and I have to say that everyone who said that Rosemarie DeWitt was robbed of an Oscar Nomination for playing Rachel was totally RIGHT!!!!!! I think she could have been nominated over Marissa Tomai or Taraji P. Henson...or maybe even the eventual winner Penelope Cruz.

And Anne Hathaway was deserving of her nomination too!

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 3/10/09 at 4:42pm

I thought the movie was very well-acted - and I agree about Rosemarie DeWitt - but I agree with an unnamed Oscar voter in EW who said, "The movie made me want to claw my skin off."

[MTVMANN]

Posted: 3/10/09 at 4:45pm

I can agree with some of that...I thought that the wedding reception lasted FOREVER!

[StageManager2]

Posted: 3/10/09 at 4:51pm

Frankly, I would've given Hathaway the Oscar over Winslet -- and Streep. She was magnificent in that. She should've gotten it for the awkward/inappropriate rehearsal dinner speech alone.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 3/10/09 at 4:53pm

I thought the wedding stuff went on forever, too. And I just find myself cringing uncomfortably for 90% of it. And when it got to the SPOILER ALERT part where she crashed the car I actually said aloud, "You have GOT to be kidding me." END SPOILER

Debra Winger looks like a million bucks, though.

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 3/10/09 at 8:41pm

As great as Hathaway and DeWitt were, I really feel that Bill Irwin was robbed of a nomination.

[Parks]

Posted: 3/10/09 at 8:52pm

The movie felt like a very ADD story... but the acting was really good. I personally am planning on getting the DVD, editing it down to 20-30 minutes of necessary scenes and reselling it to people. I could make a fortune!

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/10/09 at 9:09pm

Hated hated hated every single thing about that movie. Hated it so much I stopped watching it about halfway through.

[jeniferrenepatricia]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 2:33am

Debra Winger should've had a bigger part...she was fabulous.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 3:15am

Loved it. Great movie, brilliant acting.

Anne Hathaway: brilliant.
Debra Winger: brilliant.
Rosemarie DeWitt: brilliant. (And robbed of an Oscar nomination.)
Bill Irwin: brilliant. (And COMPLETELY robbed on an Oscar nomination.)

[broadway86]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 11:39am

My favorite film of the year. Absolutely fabulous.

I think Hathaway was definitely the best of the nominees in her category (although the transcendent, and snubbed, Sally Hawkins rules all). DeWitt, Irwin, and Winger, Jonathan Demme, and the screenplay itself were deserving of nominations.

Picture*
Director
Actress (Hathaway)
Supp. Actor (Irwin)
Supp. Actress (DeWitt)
Supp. Actress (Winger)
Orig. Screenplay*
Ensemble Cast*
Editing Updated On: 3/11/09 at 11:39 AM

[Chrysanthemum62001]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 12:05pm

Oh, I loved this movie. GREAT acting.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 3:24pm

I thought it was a brilliant example of great performances in a dreadfully boring film. I remember falling asleep at one point. And that ridiculous wedding/reception sequence went on for DAYS. Loved Hathaway and Winger, but doubt I will ever subject myself to that dismal thing again.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 3:28pm

Wanna talk about overlong wedding scenes? Rent THE DEER HUNTER sometime. My sister's wedding video was not nearly as long. :-P

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 3:31pm

Yes, the Deer Hunter's wedding scene was extremely long. It wasn't boring for me, though. I thought that entire movie was outstanding, if hard to watch at some parts.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 3:43pm

I need to watch The Deer Hunter again. I remember the wedding being long, but not nearly as dull and absurd as in Rachel Getting Married.

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 3:52pm

Exactly. I did not appreciate the cinema verite style of Rachel....Of course it's wonderful when an actor isn't obviously acting, but I didn't feel as if acting was even going on. Too much candor for me. It was so realistic that it brought back horrid memories of my own sister and the problems she caused our family.

I didn't like the art direction or cinematography either. Nor the direction.

totally unpalpable for me.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 3:55pm

"I didn't feel as if acting was even going on. Too much candor for me. It was so realistic that it brought back horrid memories of my own sister and the problems she caused our family."

...which is all part of the point. Art isn't easy.

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 3:59pm

I don't want to see a film which looks like a hidden camera was placed in a strategic location in the home of a severely disfunctional family.

[wexy]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 3:59pm

The over multiculturalness of this movie was unrealistic and not believable especially in freaking Connecticut.
Hathaway was great but the wedding party was maddening as he put all his friends in.

Updated On: 3/11/09 at 03:59 PM

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 4:08pm

I can handle the style and tone of the film. One of the most brilliant examples I've seen was The Celebration (aka Festen). The biggest difference between them, I think , was in the screenplays and editing. The Celebration Pulls you along gently through the story at first, but it builds and gains momentum turning into a whitewater rapid expedition before finally depositing you into a calm river once again. Rachel Getting Married reminded me more of a dead frog slowly drifting along in curbside rainwater, occasionally getting getting stuck on a bit of garbage, until it finally lands in a gutter. Not pretty or suspenseful or fun or even very interesting.

Dead frog. There it goes. That's it.

Updated On: 3/11/09 at 04:08 PM

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 4:10pm

Wexy, good point. I had forgotten how untrue that mix rang with me.

[fflagg]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 4:15pm

The film is one big whinefest. Wahhhhhhh I killed my brother by accident and I can't get over it.

1. the handheld camera technique has got to go
2. even though she is supposedly a drug addict Anne still has perfect hair, perfect teeth, and "fake" smokes like any other addict we have seen in a Hollywood film
3. best work: Debra Winger. A fascinating performance and the only really interesting character. Subdued and her face is great to watch. SHE deserved a nom.

All in all, this plays like a Lifetime film with a higher-caliber cast but is still a victim of whiny pretense and illogic.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 4:17pm

I do have to say that if the film made this large of an impression on all of you, then it's proof must have done something right. Sometimes the most powerful works of art create viscerally negative reactions in some. It certainly seemed like it had a lasting echo with Jane, even if it came from feelings she didn't wish to visit when the film started.

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/11/09 at 4:29pm

I get your point, Priest, but I don't exactly agree with it being a good thing that it made such an impression on me. It was a bad impression.

I didn't think anything was done well in the film, and I'd be inclined to avoid any other piece that was created by the same team.