Margaret

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 12/30/11 at 10:08am

I missed this when it played the Angelika briefly months ago, so when I saw it made a return engagement (at a different theater) I jumped at the chance to see it.

With all the controversy surrounding the release of the film and having a 2:30 run time I was prepared for a well-acted mess, but I actually really loved the movie. Anna Paquin is so freaking good, and she is in pretty much every scene. It doesn't hurt that she has such strong support from Jeannie Berlin and J. Smith-Cameron.

I liked how you alternated between feeling sympathy for Paquin and then thinking she was a wretched psychopath in the next scene. A nice study on how people deal with grief, forgiving others and themselves and the difference between wanting revenge vs justice.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 12/30/11 at 10:50am

I am ashamed to admit I've never heard of this film--I don't think the controversy reached Canada... The trailer looks great though and I am a sucker (no True Blood bad pun there) for Paquin, so hope I have the chance to see it.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 12/30/11 at 10:46pm

This played in New York for like, two weeks and I missed it. Supposedly just a glorious mess...can't wait to see it!!

[ABB2357]

Posted: 12/31/11 at 1:55pm

It's still playing at Cinema Village but probably not for much longer. A number of film critics started a Twitter campaign to get it back in theaters for a limited time.

By all means, see it - one of my favorites of the year and not the disaster everyone was expecting. Anna Paquin would be on her way to a second Oscar if the film got a proper release.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 1/3/12 at 11:27am

I finally saw it and I just can't see how anyone could honestly review this film much less give it a big rave or hard pan. It's so clearly cobbled together from a larger piece that its one of the jerkiest experiences I have recently had in the movies. A scene will begin and you think, "Wait...there was something before this" another scene will end and you go "Shouldn't there be more to that exchange?" And the last hour is an unholy mess, skipping from one point to another with absolutely no continuity or rhythym.

Supposedly, the studio was unhappy with Lonergan's cut of the movie, which ran over three hours and--after some litigation--yanked it away from him and edited it together with several of their own people. It was so obviously not handled with care.

There's so much in the movie to root for (no one writes two people having an argument quite like Lonergan) and the performances are extraordinary, but what's up on the screen feels like a ruins.

Instead of twittering that the film should get an extended release--In the hopes of the film attracting a mainstream audience? Not likely.--there should be a campaign to get Lonergan's cut of the movie released when it goes to DVD. Who knows, maybe the studio had a point, but we'll never know until we see what Lonergan wanted it to be. Until then, it just feels like a Hollywood sabotage on a par with SWING SHIFT and THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 1/3/12 at 1:17pm

According to ImDB, Martin Scorsese and Thelma Schoomaker had the final edit on the film which was, in fact, approved by Lonergan. It still felt patchy and incomplete to me.

[WOSQ]

Posted: 1/4/12 at 3:57pm

In this film's favor are the aforementioned marvelous performances. The cast includes just about every New York stage actor ever plus Renee Fleming. The performances are so spot on that I felt they almost saved the film.

I felt I was being given way too much information and that there might be a good 90-100 minute movie in there instead of one that runs 150 minutes. To me the pace was deadly and the characters were so self-involved as to be annoying (except the actors made them bearable). I did want to say out loud, "Get on with it", but I did so only internally.

The film was shot in the fall of 2005. At least one of the actors billed in the front credits has passed away as have two of the producers (Anthony Minghella and Sydney Pollack).

Giving the film the benefit of the doubt because indeed my mind did wander, who or what is 'Margaret'? I don't even remember a pet with that name much less a character. It could have gotten right by me.