Marriage Story is another reason to pay for a Netflix subscription. Last year, there were a lot of reasons to do this, and “Marriage Story” hammers another weighty nail into the coffin of excuses. Ignoring the streaming giant for any movie lover is simply impossible. We are left to either accept and enjoy or suck our paw.
So, marriage history, marriage history. What the hell is that? If you approach the tape as a deep-snot drama, an action-packed treatise or, in extreme cases, a light romcom, then the naive viewer risks flying like plywood over Paris, but not enjoying the tape.
It is better to have at least a minimal context. “Marriage Story” is an extremely simple, lifelike and hurtful everyday situation that can happen to anyone. This is a story about two people who once loved each other and may still love each other, but can no longer be with each other. The situation is aggravated by the fact that they have a young son who, against his will, is both an object of struggle and an instrument of war, and the only happiness that still brings them closer.
For all the timekeeping on the screen, there will not be a single at least some unexpected event. All the stories will be linear and predictable. But it is in this and the charm of this picture – its simplicity and grounding have a much stronger effect on the viewer, because the events on the other side of the screen do not try to distance themselves from us behind the screen of pathos, sublimity or fiction. No, the film leaves no room to dismiss the words, “That’s their problem.” These are the problems of all of us.
Share your emotions with us will be the incomparable Adam Driver and the charming Scarlett Johansson. Both produce some of the best performances of their careers. Both played a few Oscars ahead, and both likely won't get them (Ed. while writing, Oscar happened and yes, they didn't get them). They are adorable in their roles and almost single-handedly drag the intricate locomotive of storytelling on their shoulders.
The tape motivates to analyze and reflect. Viewing it itself causes the viewer to subconsciously compare his experience with the one he just saw on the screen. How not to make their mistakes? How can you not become them? I can not become them?
Marriage Story is a must-see movie for anyone who loves cinema. He just has nothing to complain about, nothing to get to. This is a model representative of the drama with a reference narrative and damn brightly revealed characters. Perhaps this is not the best choice for watching a couple in the evening under one blanket, but nevertheless you can not miss this tape.
10 out of 10
This story is as old as the world. At one point, two people meet, fall in love, get married. It was okay, but not now. The story of Charlie and Nicole's breakup is sad. Everything would be fine, but there is a son – Henry, to whom both parents are attached with their all-consuming love. It's a movie where, until the very end, I couldn't take sides. The way the main characters talk about each other’s positive traits at the beginning of the film, and how the film ends in the same way, is an interesting storytelling move and very moving (for me). The film is not romanticized, it does not make the fact of separation something insignificant, simple and easy. It is difficult for heroes to keep the line when it seems that the person you once loved is not the same as before. They're not together anymore, but they're still close. Mental and physical pain, tears and smiles from memories - all this is intertwined and makes you empathize. I got a pleasant impression from the visual picture of the film, the color scheme and musical instrumental accompaniment. The ending of the film turned out to be bright and not burdening, I am glad that in such a story the director decided to make a simple and uncomplicated ending. I think as time goes on, I'll revisit this picture.
It is difficult to find a description of what is actually 'Marriage history'. Don’t get me wrong, I understand that this is a two-hour story of Nicole and Charlie’s divorce, but what the movie is about is not entirely clear. I had several options.
Perhaps, I thought, the movie is about love not being eternal and everything has an end. It’s hard to imagine a bigger banalism, but the film is not about that. The fact that there was some love between these two people suggest guessing from the four-minute introductory scene with voiceovers, the rest of the timekeeping is busy breaking up the marriage relationship.
Perhaps the marriage story is that even in such a situation it is important to remain human. Not either. After the divorce, Nicole wants to take her son with her to another city and instead of discussing this with her husband, she hires a lawyer. Then he decides to take all the property, of course. And alimony to the heap. Charlie is sorry at first, but he also has skeletons in his closet, and what is happening on the screen gives the impression that he is not a father (except for those four minutes of the briefing, so to speak). Charlie is also hired for similar purposes. This all does not fit with the fact that when meeting the spouses as nice and respectful behave with each other. So, two hypocritical scumbags sawing off a baby and money, but I don't really feel for them. It has not been possible to remain human.
I would like to sympathize with the child in this situation, but he is absolutely up to the light bulb, he does not need my sympathy.
Or is it a film about the imperfection of the judiciary? This is mentioned just casually, transparently as possible. And not to say that the main characters are victims of bureaucracy, they chose this path. Lawyers look like cattle too, but they’re just doing the work they’re hired to do.
So I came to the conclusion that Marriage Story is a film about how profitable it is to be a lawyer in the United States.
To say that watching such a movie is boring is to say nothing. The narrative is as slow as possible, there are no plot twists from the word at all. Charlie flies to Los Angeles, leaves Los Angeles, flies back, flies back. There are a few peak moments, such as when Nicole and Charlie finally decide to discuss their marriage in high tones towards the end of the film. Usually people first sort out a relationship and then decide to get divorced, but here’s the opposite. Makes sense, doesn't it? This scene has no influence on the plot, by the way. Nothing affects this sleeping realm at all. The characters do not get any development, the spouses pour scavengers on each other, but pretend that nothing is happening, as they were at the beginning of the film, so they remained at the end.
There are also some women who are harassed. Again, leading to nothing and unfounded, it is unnecessary to go into details.
All this is already in the middle of the film forces to shake the air & #39; but when will you end already?' - which in itself is already a significant achievement worthy of an Oscar nomination.
“Marriage Story”: Divorce as a Reason to Talk About Love
A chamber and mostly acting film by Noah Baumbach (in the genre of drama, but rather a melodrama with elements of comedy and even a musical) about the divorce in the family of a theater director (Adam Driver) and an actress (Scarlett Johansson) with complications in the form of clarifying relationships, competing lawyers, fighting for custody of a child and traveling to different parts of the country (than a geographical metaphor of alienation?). At the same time, the director’s clear intention is to show a love story through the prism of divorce, as evidenced not only by regularly discovered artifacts of past love relationships, but also by the list of good qualities of each other compiled by divorcing parents on the instructions of a family psychologist used in the exposition function.
As to the reasons for the dissolution of the marriage, indirect information about this comes from mutual claims of the warring parties, expressed mainly in terms of dissatisfaction with status. But, as is often the case with such belated games of domination, everyone names milestones, not causes, which, if they exist at all, are distributed by a multitude of decisions and small changes in a long process in which loved ones gradually become strangers and cease to seek agreement.
Films are not explained, but shown. In addition, there is no need to explain much, if the context is set and there are such films-precursors. For example, the vagueness of gender roles and the right of a woman to something other than marriage has already been artistically communicated to the mass audience (including the Soviet one) by the film Kramer vs. Kramer, which in Marriage Story is not only repeated in plot and composition, but also almost literally quoted in individual episodes. The most famous author’s film about the breakup of the family, “Scenes from married life” by Ingmar Bergman “appears” in “Marriage Story” in the form of a photograph of the spouses engaged in the theatrical production of the same name. We also recall similar Woody Allen films Annie Hall and Husbands and Wives, which seem to be comedic inversions of Bergman’s “divorce” films.
In addition, Baumbach himself almost shot a series about a dysfunctional family (based on Jonathan Franzen’s novel “Amendments”), and before he had already shot a good movie (“Squid and the Whale”, “Margot at the Wedding”), however, in “Marriage Story” there are much fewer heroes, more symmetry (you can’t say which of the spouses is more guilty of divorce), more economical plot, relief of the opposition (man / woman, father / mother, theater / cinema, New York / Los Angeles), which makes the film begin to resemble a parable. Surprisingly, with such an abundance of quotes, influences and allusions, “Marriage Story” remains an independent, well-tailored, exciting and fresh picture.
It’s been a long time since I’ve enjoyed a movie like this: the script, the actors, the overall atmosphere at a high level. The theme of divorce in this film is colored with light shades, of this no one makes a special tragedy, and it bribes.
The topic of psychology (gaslighting will be discussed separately - for this, a special thank you to the psychologist-consultant with whom each episode in the script was worked out) in the relations of divorcing couples has been raised more than once. But this picture is impossible to compare with anything, as well as the characters.
Nicole. I think that many men and even some women will not understand the motives guiding Nicole (Johansson) when she decides to divorce, because the apparent closeness of the characters and the absence of scandals in the family do not speak about her well-being. The actions of the heroine may seem selfish. But let’s not forget about the essence of a healthy relationship: no one is obliged to feel worse in favor of a partner. It is the awareness and self-perception of emptiness, when you are perceived not as a person with feelings and other needs, that pushes it to such a difficult step. It is an escape from toxic relationships and depreciation.
Charlie. Explain the behavior of the main character (Driver) is not difficult, especially after the conversation – the scandal with Nicole. A kind of typical collective way of thinking of a modern man who has opportunities for creative self-realization. However, it does not occur to him to listen to the needs of his wife. Very indicative of the moment of turning off the light: he came out, there is no one in the room (Nicole = nobody). At a certain point he becomes very sorry when he lies in the kitchen and seems to realize his worthlessness and helplessness in many respects. No one in this pair is Charlie.
Henry. It is especially gratifying that the child’s son was created with the expectation that the child does not ask trivial questions and does not suffer (at least, obviously) from the fact that the parents no longer live together (yes, in this context!). At this age, children do not always ask questions, and with frequent meetings with his father, he simply has no time to suffer from his absence. In addition, because the environment does not make the divorce a tragedy or broadcast it to the boy, he can not perceive it as something terrible and nightmarish.
Honestly, there have been several expectations in twists on the plot (based on the actions and consultations of the lawyers of the main characters). And very pleased with the fact that the writers did not go into all seriousness, and, no matter what, went the path of reasonable actions and preservation of human relations between the characters.
It is impossible to talk about the masterpiece of the picture, because there are enough “raw” moments (a meeting of Charlie with his mother-in-law, a consultation with a lawyer Jay, an episode with a knife + accumulated and unspoken discontent for some reason – that breaks out only at the end, and not at the mediator at the reception), but here is a typical “criticism”, purely individual perception.
The end of the film is very reminiscent of the film “The Wife” with G. Close, when it becomes obvious the fact of the true belonging of the genius. This moment was especially pleasurable, not so much out of female solidarity as out of a sense of triumphant justice.
In general, everyone in this film will find an interesting side of interpersonal relationships and draw appropriate conclusions.
Among all the upcoming Oscar nominees are the epic Joker by Todd Phillips, the monumental Irishman by Martin Scorsese, the acclaimed Once Upon a Time in Hollywood by Quentin Tarantino, the formalist 1917. Sam Mendes – quiet and modest “Marriage Story” Noah Baumbuck seems to me the most subtle, most refined and the best of all the above works.
I don’t want to talk or write much about this movie. Everything is very clean, everything is clear. But among all its plot collisions, there is something lurking between the lines. Something we call the magic of cinema. Something that can not be expressed in words, it only needs to be seen.
Noah Baumbuck made perhaps the best film of his career and unambiguously gave Adam Driver, Scarlett Johansson and Laura Dern some of the best works in their acting pantheons. And he gave the viewer a gracefully composed and executed, painfully sad and at the same time not without beautiful humor story about how love between two people disappears and is replaced by diametrically opposite feelings. About the empty space that remains after the breakup of relationships and which (even after healing all the wounds of the soul) remains a kind of zone that is scary to touch and with which you do not know what to do next. About how to live after all this. It is about how our highest feelings are always in the context of society and how this society can influence us. About how any connection, even if it is completed, remains with us forever, whether we like it or not.
Fighting for this topic is like walking on the edge of the ice. In the entire history of cinema, there will be no more than a dozen films that successfully coped with this task. Marriage is definitely one of them.
I liked the movie and it was a pretty good drama. In my opinion, the film has only two weak points - dubbing and Scarlett Johansson. Well, not dubbing, but voiceover. I don’t like watching movies and TV shows with voiceover dubbing, because sometimes it’s hard to make out some words or phrases and acting gets pretty bad. Acting for me is based only on emotions and pronunciation of phrases. Emotions turned out on the faces of the actors convincing. Scarlett, for me, is one of the worst moments of the movie. I used to see her in the role of Black Widow from Marvel, where she is a strong and independent woman who does not believe in love. In other projects, except ' Lucy' (where the character of these characters is similar), I have not seen this actress and I was not used to seeing her in a film about family ties even surprised, although the actress really played well.
Plot:
The girl and the guy on the set met, soon fell in love and married and had a child - Henry. Then something happens and the couple decides to divorce and fight for the rights of the child. The plot is quite fresh and I rarely met him and he impressed me.
Main characters:
Adam Driver is a great actor, who everyone knows for the role of Kylo from Star Wars. Here he also played well and in my opinion the best of all the characters of this film - he has his own story arc, he goes through his development, etc. About the character Scarlett I have already told, here her character is quite cute and perfectly played. Their son I do not like because of the actor - he somehow weakly and without ideas played his role.
Secondary Heroes:
Laura Dern did a good movie - clap. Her character is a lawyer for Scarlett, who helps her fight off her father’s rights to the child. The Scarlett family is also well written and played.
Soundtrack:
He's good, but nothing more. There are sad melodies, there are funny and a lot of all quality good.
Bottom line: it’s a good movie, but Scarlett Johansson and just a voiceover, not a normal dubbing, it’s better to watch it in the original. There is a lot of drama and a great message.
Very warm film, with a soft musical accompaniment. All in the spirit of the classics, as if the film was shot not in 2019, but in the time of Mrs. Doubtfire.
Heroes are alive and real, so it is difficult to take sides in the divorce process, not for nothing they say that both are always to blame for the conflict. Although there is no obvious conflict in this film, there comes a point when something inside starts to boil and provoke change. And people withdraw, cease to hear each other, concentrating only on themselves and their desires.
I don't know how it would be better to stay together or be amicably separated. Both of these actions take courage and fortitude to go through a divorce with dignity and remain true to oneself.
It's also a very good idea, though not a new one, that what's good for your child isn't necessarily good for you. And then you need to properly prioritize, perhaps pushing your needs to the background. And, probably, after a while, it will turn out that these needs were not so important at all.
Love manifests itself in small things, like a tied shoelace, while the other’s hands are busy.
8 out of 10
This is a story about a married couple who cannot talk or hear each other.
As one family therapy psychologist noted, it is easier for some people to get divorced than to declare and defend their desires. And this is true, because it often takes courage, sincerity and openness. So the main character of the film was easier to decide to start a divorce than to start talking to her husband, to discuss and defend the rights to their desires.
On the other hand, it is difficult for some people to convey their truth and find their understanding until there are changes in their lives that will be associated with a violation of the usual way of life, as happened with the husband of the main character. And this is the main conflict between the characters of the film, in which one wants to change his life, and therefore the whole family, and the other with all his might to keep a comfortable world that suits him.
How the film ends will divorce, whether the main characters will part is not clear until the end of the film. Of course, as a spectator, I always wanted to hope for a happy ending. At the same time, the director managed to show two completely different personalities, two different people who love each other, but who have accumulated a lot of discontent, irritation and mutual resentment over the years of marriage, which they were able to express to each other only at the moment when the relationship broke down. They didn’t find the opportunity to talk about it in every single situation throughout their family life, but rather accumulated it until negative feelings and emotions flooded like tones of water through a dam.
The meaning of the film is that a person cannot be happy if he does not live his life, that when he dissolves in marriage and forgets about his desires and ambitions, at some point he begins to rebel, change his life and often resort to the most radical measures.
Now a little bit about acting. I am not a fan of actress Scarlett Johansson. Throughout the film, I did not leave the feeling that the image of the heroine is not close to the actress and she rather repeats the image she saw, which she studied and observed, rather than penetrated and got used to it. All the time there was a feeling that she was saying: “I’m not like this, I don’t like such people and they are not close to me, and I just do well and diligently only play the image of the heroine.” Something like, "I'm too smart for this role where you have to play an ordinary woman." And maybe it's just my projections, my subjective perception of the actress in this role.
Some scenes, such as playing the main character on stage at the beginning of the film, her story about her marriage to a lawyer, a major quarrel between the spouses or the fall of the main character from stress, after visiting a forensic psychologist, caused either a feeling of awkwardness, the so-called Spanish shame or look like a theatrical production in the play. The latter was most likely conceived by the director, but I somehow did not get such a manner of performance that causes the feeling that the actors do not finish. Perhaps the director tried to bring the actors’ play as close to life as possible, to cause a sense of realism that actors do not play roles on the screen, but behave as in life, another such feeling arises when watching scenes from family life shot on a home camera.
But despite the various roughnesses, as well as the fact that the film was initially somewhat delayed, the film is good, the film is filled with meaning, the film tells about love, ordinary life and the struggle for your own happiness, does not leave a sense of wasted time.
And it is pleasantly pleased that directors continue to shoot films in which there are few events, actions, action, and in the camera lens there are relationships between the main characters, their inner world, thoughts and experiences.
The film, despite the apparent external simplicity and simplicity, is not entertaining, at times tense. After watching the film, at least you want to relax, and at least dessert with tea to sweeten your life and of course share your impressions of the film!
Good to see you!
On the eve of ' Oscar' there is a need to see missed for any reason ' the main & #39; last year's films nominated for the most awards - so I finally got to ' Marriage Story' Noah Baumbaka.
There is nothing in the world of cinema worse than not just bad, but bad, but pretentious cinema: that is, one that tries to seem profound and relevant, being inherently ordinary mediocrity. At the heart of the plot ' Marriage Story' - the unsuccessful marriage of the characters Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver, which falls apart in front of the viewer, causing many problems to both parties. The vector of development chosen by the director becomes obvious from the very first scenes: to show how the negative gradually accumulates in spouses who keep silent about claims to each other; how it subsequently spills out, destroying the marriage; how they themselves and their loved ones, especially children, suffer from this; and so on. The adversity that confronts the characters in the course of the narrative would ultimately lead to changes in their worldview, attitude, awareness, or loss of something they can no longer regain. This concept would work.
But Baumbuck's film doesn't work at all. This is a tedious, drawn-out movie about people who create problems and suffer from them for themselves out of the blue, and it is presented in such a way that the behavior of the characters does not cause empathy and understanding, but rather a reaction in the spirit of ' well, you are stupid...'. The narrative is monotonous, devoid of dynamics, reminiscent of the average TV series on the channel ' Russia' but with the difference that in these endless ' Wedding Rings' and with him with the characters and then there are more changes, and their actions lead to at least some consequences. Here, all the hardships that fall on the lot of the main characters do not change their attitude to the situation, do not change their behavior in any way, do not affect their decisions. The director in no way shows the destructive power of similar conflicts, since everything that happened during the film does not affect the main characters (without specific examples, since they can already be considered as spoilers). Moreover: in contrast to the recent 'Dislike' Zvyagintseva (also very mediocre, but for other reasons), where too much time was devoted to the obvious idea that children always suffer in conflicts between parents, in this opus the son of a divorcing and actively scandalous couple generally does not react to their divorce: he absolutely does not care, in any scene the boy does not show his concern, does not ask parents for reasons. Of course, coupled with the fact that at the age of eight he can not read and receives awards for going big, you can think that he suffers from some kind of mental disorder, but since the film itself says nothing about it, this is not so for the viewer, and therefore the child’s behavior looks extremely strange and unnatural, and even does not contribute to the disclosure of the topic.
It seems that the script was written, as they say, on the knee. There is a scene in the finale that, again, cannot be described without spoilers, but, in short, in it, the child accidentally finds a thing that, apparently, Scarlett Johansson’s heroine accidentally leaves in a prominent place and in which Scarlett Johansson accidentally outlines what is very important for the hero Adam Driver, who accidentally came home to his ex-wife at this moment, and judging by the editing, music and composition, this moment is implied as a climax. When so many ‘gods from the machine’ are used in an ordinary household drama to create such a climax, it’s about something, yes.
However, of course, if we continue to draw a parallel with the series on ' Russia', it should be said that in terms of acting to all who are involved in ' Marriage Story', far from the terrible replays of domestic unrecognized stars: all play from ' not bad ' to ' good ' but no one hits and jumps above his head, and therefore as many as three actor nominations on 'Oscar' Look as strange as nominations in other categories. Ironically, it is the characters whose performers – Ray Liotta and Alan Alda – were not nominated, and the reason is simple: both were given too little screen time, and their roles are essentially similar and could be combined, which would bring one of them a deserved nomination. A masterful approach, you can't say anything.
The result is a picture that goes on for more than two hours and does not reveal any of the problems raised during this time. Some scenes came out successfully (for example, Liotta and Durn's quarrel in court and the subsequent scandal of the spouses), but the overall impression ... not even to say that it was spoiled by some shortcomings, no - it is simply absent. The film is devoid of integrity, does not involve the viewer in the narrative, does not make you believe in what is happening, and, in the end, is not worth the time spent.
“Well, will I go if you just sit here and suck each other?” asked Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) in the presence of her husband Charlie (Adam Driver) and a family psychologist.
The story of the divorce process of a New York theater director and his wife, a leading actress, did not foreshadow being so emotionally heavy.
It was quite unexpected that Noah Baumbuck, who directed the beautiful airy “Sweet Frances”, will make the tape, in depth and degree of cold despair, leaving far behind the late Radiohead records.
The film begins with the presentation of spouses going to break up, the best features of each other, and this part for some reason many find protracted, but I saw one of the best examples of exposure in a feature film.
But for what happened next, I was not completely ready. Because cinema is an “art of fiction” and for it to catch on, it MUST NOT be a complete coincidence with reality.
So, Baumbuck, being a brilliant screenwriter, did exactly the opposite.
Adam and Scarlett behave in the frame so naturally that the viewer instantly disappears the feeling of the slightest detachment from what is happening and he begins to panic in the emotional depths of the tape.
You recognize, feel all this mental pain - so deep that there is nothing to express it, you can only smile confusedly and pretend that everything is fine.
Conceived as a climax, the quarrel between the spouses that broke out still strikes with its own absurdity - seemingly sharp and offensive, words fly into an impenetrable wall of alienation and understanding how far everything has gone, and how late it is to try to correct something.
Of course, the ex-spouses, bypassing all lawyers, will agree on custody of their child - and you sit and in numb despair look at the credits floating at the end and walking along the sun-drenched Avenue Charlie with your son.
Avant-garde theater director Charlie (Adam Driver) reluctantly lets his main actress and wife Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) to shoot the series in Los Angeles. He is sure that the script for the project is weak, so everything should be limited to the pilot series, and the producers will not continue. By contrast, his theater in New York is on the rise, and soon one of the productions will hit Broadway. Besides, my son goes to school here, and all his friends are here on the East Coast. Charlie's pretty sure about a lot of things, so he just doesn't notice his family falling apart.
For a film based on divorce, in 'Marriage Story' a staggering amount of love. Not without reason, even the name emphasizes union, not disintegration. In couples who objectively cannot be together, there is often a memory of moments and trifles that once caused a rush of feelings. You know in your mind that you have to cross out the past, move on, break out of suffocating bonds. However, the routine of the heart can not argue. Especially when it comes to raising a child.
Divorce is spoiled not by a lack of love, but by stereotypical institutions, says director Noah Baumbach. All those starving lawyers devouring money that they put aside to educate their children. All these gossips among friends and sneaky relatives. This is all about housing.
Divorce is a great way to finally hear each other. To say all the accumulated without looking back on ' they lived happily ever after'. Purify yourself in a climactic quarrel and disperse your paths much happier people.
At first, without the information that comes up during the fights, the viewer sympathizes with Charlie. He looks like a lost child, punished for nothing. Then you know, it's a relationship symmetry - Nicole used to feel just as lost, but married. This is especially evident in passing remarks and gestures.
Okay, Nicole knows everything about Charlie, even what salad he's gonna order. In turn, the ex-husband does not remember from which album Bowie his ex-wife borrowed the image for Halloween.
The phenomenal play of the main actors elevates these dialogues to the heart of the tragedy of misunderstanding in the modern family. Critics say the director was inspired by his own story of breaking up with actress Jennifer Jason Lee. In my opinion, about eight years have passed. His perception of the past was clearly influenced by his subsequent marriage to Greta Gerwig (director ' Lady Bird' and ' Little Women'). This film is the look of a man who now understands women much better and who has learned to forgive. A view that everyone should learn.
Slowly unfolds the story of two people who want to divorce, the story is tightening, the story does not sag. We must pay tribute to the film - no templates and stamps, as vital as possible. Actors are amazing, both first and second plan. The picture deftly juggles sympathy between the main characters. I really enjoyed it.
It is not easy to live in a modern world, although it should be different. Civilization offers man everything from security to object luxury, but he still suffers. Strangers meet under the cover of night, cross eyes and diverge forever. Someone decides on a relationship without imagining its possible deplorable consequences, when dreams seemed windy and easy, and the planet could be moved from orbit at will. Love surpassed ambition. And this is not the first time, and it will not be the last time. A slippery feeling will always cloud. Some will be able to temper him to true love, while others will remain with nothing, crying for unfulfilled great hopes. Like Nicole and Charlie, two restless hearts consumed by young dreams, with careless faith in their own happiness rushing along the highway of fate to well-being. As capacitors of young energy, the two met with people without status, without defining fame, to make the mistake of millions, and director Noah Baumbach will show it. Or rather, another variation of this error.
Such is life, no matter how trivial these words may sound. People make mistakes in love, but they will never learn to avoid them again. But every story is unique. The Barber couple are here. She could not withstand the burden of her own selfishness, coupled with arrogance, why she is forced to crack and break, killing the world around her. And why? From the first minutes it is not clear: a strong family lives chorusily, the lips of the heroes read only laudatory odes to each other, and the feeling of tragedy does not arise ... until the fun noisy rooms of the apartment with the joyful boy Henry will not replace the cozy, but stuffy room with a psychologist in the middle. And later, the reason for the divorce process will turn into the leitmotif of the film, to which Baumbach will give an atypical but vague answer, offering to analyze many things independently. After all, it is obvious that ' Marriage Story' and despite the standardity of the phenomenon of movie drama on the subject of parting can not be called familiar. It’s not about the variety of love stories. People are just atypical in the spotlight.
Charlie. Nicole. Who are you? Mythological pillars that stand out from the mass of everyday life? Water and rock, ice and flame? Or are you just ordinary, fallen-in-love fools who don’t deserve big metaphors? The answer is out of reach. They do not understand themselves, they have lost themselves in the middle of family and work life, when the definition of their feelings overshadowed masks. He's a theater director, she's an actress, and they're both lost in playful imagery to the point where everyday life and play merge into a production outside the Broadway pavilions and dusty backstreets of Times Square. They slightly expose their souls erased by routine turmoil in front of relatives and colleagues who do not understand, but will adapt to the situation, and in the process of parting will lose morality. Permanently, not definitively, but with a sufficient share for divorce to become a trigger for chain lawyers, enthusiastically destroying the marriage in court before the unseen judge and after the hearing. The terrible thing is that against the background of events, the actions of lawyers trying to get along with clients a little, a little bit amicably, are more expensive than joint conversations between spouses, meetings, attempts to reconcile, because the motive of the defender is measured exclusively in cash, he is neither a friend nor an enemy in everyday life. And in order to destroy the marriage, you have to hire these friends. It sounds both disgusting and wild, especially with the question 'why?', which became the leitmotif of history.
There is no reasonable answer to the question. More precisely, a fair answer. An answer that could potentially help you learn something. For that, melodrama is one of the oldest genres in art: not for trusting others, albeit fictional, fates, but for the opportunity to draw experience from them. Life is too short to be constantly wasted on broken relationships, especially when it comes to marriage and children. Noah Baumbach shot, rather, too pointy and specific tape about the fate of two people who are looking for a place in the spaces of life to spread power, power at least for themselves. As a result, ' Marriage Story' looks existential, almost philosophical, with unrealized inclinations of some Krzysztof Kieslowski, which has no clearly expressed root problems with a sufficiently filled content both in the case of symbolism and psychology. The director hints that the Barbers in the heat of war for their son Henry become lone wolves. One dresses up in the classic Wells-Universal Invisible Man, as if hinting at the sphericality of himself in the world, the other - in a member ' Orchestra of the Lonely Hearts Club of Sergeant Pepper'. One will rush between his personal life and work, the other will react emotionally to any metamorphosis, including through fleeting romances. Charlie and Nicole hide their loneliness in this way. After spending so many years in useless cohabitation, they lost the best years, left aging ahead. There may not be another chance to fix it. . .
But the most controversial thing is that they both need a child to eliminate loneliness. As opium to a drug addict, or as salvation to a drowning man, Henry is a fleeting panacea. For the sake of a short meeting with a boy from New York, his father flies to Los Angeles to satisfy his psychological pathology and fly to work further. The legal fight for him is generally ridiculous, because at these very meetings Charlie is often superfluous, hangs out as an extra and looks like a stranger. And the mother does not even have to rent it: it is enough when you want. Henry looks like a dummy, running from parent to parent because of the desire to possess him, to feel someone nearby. This is evident in the behavior of the child, who absolutely does not care about what is happening in the family. No matter that there was a discord, that the beloved father gradually disappears and generally becomes an uninteresting black-haired biomass, Henry does not ask questions about events, does not cry, somehow does not express indifference, but continues to live as if nothing changes. Hence, cinema becomes more amorphous, because it shows not a tragic story, but an oblong behavior of ancestors (an excellent term for describing them) with the habits of the rulers, their expressionistic experiences. And there is a feeling that this story does not need a child. Passion for society would be perfectly offset by other acquaintances.
And the couple, it seems, did not lose anything, just as they did not gain anything, just passing the life stage. Experience? Not in the tape: the characters do not change, and to think for them - a maveton. Let wonderful actors, directors, virtuoso operators introduce a qualitative being: the heroes continue to conduct everyday conversations with their relatives, dissecting them with not funny jokes and outrageously ridiculous mentions of gays, lawyer Nora Fanshaw will continue to talk about how she sued Tom Petty himself - nothing changes. Barbers themselves become members of the legendary ballad Petty - they fall freely. And therefore 'Marriage Story' is a dubious drama.
6 out of 10.
Difficult family relationships in the Oscar nomination
Noah Baumbuck gave a heavy melodrama, an urgent problem of families and the impact of such a problem on the public. Marriage based on feelings and love goes through many trials, and the midlife crisis draws more and more stages of coping. Children are a strong and important step in marriage. Responsibility above all else, opportunity and desire should be equal, but not when children serve as an excuse for preserving marriage, but are really conceived out of love.
Love meets the viewer from the first frames, the husband talks about his wife, the wife about her husband. Such a nice idyll. Features of camera work seem to refer us to the documentary project, doing tricks on the faces of actors, filming them from below and rotating the camera by the effect of presence. Creative marriage, which seems to show similar hobbies, interests and views, is still influenced from within. It is not in vain that they say that you need to live together in order to get used to each other, sacrifice something of your own and agree to various conditions. But the brutal scene at the reception at the family psychologist puts the limits of detachment.
In terms of tension and awkwardness, the picture can be compared to the “Road of Change” by Sam Mendes. "Marriage Story" is gaining momentum from inconvenientities and quarrels to cardinal decisions. The film demonstrates the intricacies of the divorce process in the present time, to open more and more new family secrets through flashbacks. Scarlett Johansson impressed with the emotional intensity, showed an interesting man: a wife who had grounds for filing for divorce. It seems that the peaceful decision of the spouses, it seems, the fervor subsides, but this is only the calm before the storm to act sharply and decisively.
I'm sorry that's happening. It is a pity that the unit of society suffers. It is a pity that for the sake of victory spouses use a child. Honestly, I did not like my son, his behavior is not appropriate for school age, and skills border on the level of kindergarten behavior. Constantly attributing it as a means of meeting, the wife goes to easy measures, but the absurdity of these measures destroys the usual concept of upbringing. Here is a deep, vital message, the relevance of the problem in the education of children. Pamper, pity and give rewards for the elementary things that any sane child can do himself. It works amazingly. And any means of education and etiquette training are faced with the conflict of the picture, which for lawyers is another evidence.
Adam Driver looks great as a desperate father. Questions of choice between family and career are raised, which gives rise to ambiguous opinion, and scandals on this basis bring out the entire environment of the wife and increase the income of lawyers. I want to turn to common sense: someone should work and bring income. But what if a husband has a job in one city and a wife in another? Complex relationships are tested by distance, and the separation of the child under the contract demonstrates the parents’ relationship to the common child. I’m certainly on the Driver side of the story, but there are no innocent heroes here, as Adam has skeletons in his closet. On the other hand, Scarlett, “burden”, tries to approach with care and love, that’s just able to overpower his actions, which also affects the upbringing. It is not necessary to follow the lead of the child, but it is worth educating. The son looks like Dani from Kubrick’s The Shining.
The problem with the pastime of a parent and a child gives an excellent assessment of the views and actions to maintain a normal relationship with his son, but as for the spouses themselves, Baumbak has slashed heavy artillery in the face of lawyers. Here comes the Oscar nomination in the face of Laura Dern. All tolerant issues are immediately stipulated: femenism, equality, non-traditional sexual orientation (the latter casually, but the Academy will like it) – a complete set for the nomination. On the opposite side of her husband is not so clear, Alan Alda, Ray Liotta (the latter was nice to meet on the screen).
Proceedings in court make you “dig” in the dirty laundry of spouses, cruel evidence, an excellent argument of lawyers, where some arguments are weighty, and you agree with them, others are sucked out of your finger, absurd and naturally tolerant. The struggle has crossed the boundaries of home, which is why attitudes towards the main characters change. You don't justify your actions, you stand up for them, you put yourself in Driver's shoes, and you don't approve of acting with a lawyer, but outside of court, this cacophony turns into family drama again. The episode with a representative of the child guardianship causes such emotions that you want to intervene and help the Driver, but so the plot developed. By malice.
Personal scores between Johansson and Driver go through a cycle of emotions and feelings, where there is a place for both lovingly positive sides and terribly negative ones. As a result, the final of the picture is not built at all in the mood of melodramas. Scalette played to the fullest, Adam did not concede his role, which eventually resulted in a chic screen duo. Essie Robertson infuriated, but the role is such, nothing can be done, and in places, Laura Dern performed very little (for what nomination?).
With his latest film, Noah Baumbach fully proved that he became one of the largest indie directors in the United States, not just the second Woody Allen, but an independent and consistent director in his themes and concepts. Openly focusing on “Scenes from Married Life”, Baumbach in one of the scenes of “Marriage Story” quotes this film Bergman, moreover, the scene becomes the emotional culmination of the picture and one of the toughest in his filmography.
In the 2010s, moving away from the stylistics of his viscous, somewhat tedious dramas (Squid and the Whale, Margot at the Wedding), Baumbach moved on to staging tragicomedies, which were much more successful at him - the aesthetics of New York and the poetics of marginal life in a large metropolis were so organic in them. “Marriage Story” shows that a new serious stage has begun in his work: finally, his dramas are emotionally balanced already at the level of the script, the reference points for dramatic conflicts are implicitly, smoothly, but in their places.
The acting performance of not only leading stars (here is Driver and Johansson), but also secondary artists (also not newcomers – Liotta and Dern) is flawless, in addition, these two pairs seem to shade each other: if the characters of Driver and Johansson really experience, then their lawyers are deliberately caricatured, predatory, inhuman. While placing emphasis on Kramer vs. Kramer, that is, looking at the history of divorce with male eyes and blaming the emancipated neurotic woman for most of the troubles, Baumbach does not sink to an open anti-feminist message.
Heroes are not as unambiguous as it may seem: yes, the heroine of Johansson first demolishes the roof (who would have thought that this actress conceals such an extraordinary dramatic talent, Woody Allen discovered in her only the talent of a comedian), but the alter ego of Baumbach performed by Driver in the climactic scene will tell her such that the ears of an intelligent viewer wilt. “Marriage Story” is needed primarily for married and married sinophiles to show that divorce is hell beyond any problems of family life. It can be said that Baumbach made a film warning all spouses about what divorce is and that it should be avoided by any means.
So to know the mechanisms of divorce could only the one who survived it, and, of course, the most painful aspect of this process, here with the Director can not disagree – it is the division of the child. Once in “Squid and the Whale” Baumbach tried to show a similar conflict, and even to portray it through the eyes of children, but it turned out not so convincing, powerful and piercing as in “Marriage Story”, where we see the conflict through the eyes of spouses. This is a very mature film, which also has a place for humor, irony, sarcasm (otherwise it would not be Baumbach), but the main center of gravity is still in a dramatic, almost tragic sphere.
“Marriage Story” is a very painful movie, sometimes unbearably familiar to those who have tasted the hardships of marriage, but it, like “Eyes Wide Shut,” is entirely familyistic. Of course, unlike Kubrick, who shot widely and beat out everything that threatened the family, Baumbach works chamberly, intimately, but in this modest format, the true Bergman power beats the key. “Marriage Story” shows that under the fashion in the hipster environment is not a child-free and free-love director, but a real traditionalist, urging married couples to solve their problems on the shore, without bringing them to divorce.
The couple, theatrical director Charlie and actress Nicole decided to peacefully separate. But the divorce process is complicated by the issue of custody of their young son, lawyer intrigues and old mutual grievances.
Absolutely life story that a bunch of my friends had. Honestly, there is little fabulous in this divorce process. On the contrary, the movie is very realistic, but not from the category of tear-pressing, just sad and sometimes boring, but absolutely watchable. Everything was fine until they started living in two cities. Yes, these people of creative professions and their views on life are quite different from our interests, but films about let’s say – lumpens are not necessarily more interesting, on the contrary, more tearful, unsightly aspects of life, up to outright black. And more often - just a boring and sad picture of the spiritual and everyday bottom.
The film is beautiful, begins with the non-trivial characteristics of the characters that sound from the lips of the spouses: he talks about her, she talks about him, both with love and sadness, as if delving into memory and finding favorite features and moments that were forgotten in everyday life. Because 'Marriage history' and not 'Divorce proceedings' that is not about the trial itself, and about life BEFORE the words of the characters of the picture. The director, as accurately as possible, managed to tell about the relationship between the two people with hints and small touches from their present, without resorting to flashbacks. Fine work and filigree of the actors in the aggregate did their job: the picture was noticed by the audience, even if it did not go at the box office, but was released on Netflix.
The picture consists of very long scenes of clarifying the relationships of the characters. Sometimes there are comic situations, sometimes not very pleasant. The characters gather for a long time with thoughts and their claims to each other that when both are on edge ... can no longer stop their hurtful words, thereby causing even more and inevitable pain. It would seem that they fled, still young and full of hopes for the future, but what to do with the child, whom everyone loves very much? He also becomes another stumbling block that wants the attention of both and provokes parents to new conflicts.
The cast is very impressive. Dear melancholic Driver in tandem with a strong ' hysterical' Johansson, very colorfully shade each other, thereby allowing you to accumulate claims and grievances, which at one moment begin to tear everything down on their way, not knowing mercy and mercy. Each is gradually revealed in 2 hours of storytelling, engaging in offensive dialogue. Separately, I will highlight lawyer roles and divorce policy: Laura Dern (this is an Oscar - 100%) and Ray Liotta simply tear family values apart, thereby devaluing everything they have earned and personal.
Here everything is conversational: touching, sad, sweet, lyrical, in places restrained. The final surprised, he directly brought the heroes to a new round of relations. And honestly, that's a huge plus of this picture. I hope this ' the story of marriage' will serve as an example for many families and serve as a kind of elimination of any claims and ambitions in the future.
8 out of 10
“Marriage Story” is an excellent example of how a completely simple life story forms the basis of a terribly interesting theatrical story. If you want to watch something “exciting”, but not too narratively overloaded, this film is just right for it. However, the plot is not the first thing I want to pay attention to in this picture.
The main plus of the film for me was the acting work of absolutely caste, but the most delighting, of course, Johansson and Driver. To be honest, Scarlett has never been for me the standard of great acting, which I want to watch in every film played by an actress. Yes, she was good in Translation Hardships, very beautifully and sexually voiced the AI in Her, and we are all very used to Black Widow in the MCU. But still, I could not call her my favorite actress, exactly before watching Marriage Story. Johansson received all the nominations for the prestigious awards absolutely deserved, and, of course, she more than deserves an Oscar. In all the emotions played, you unconditionally believe that the actress does not overplay, there is no falsehood or any “failure”. Adam Driver deserves the same laudatory reviews, which also has absolutely no drawbacks, and who should also have received an Oscar (if not for Phoenix, of course). The joint work of two amazing artists produces a proper impression that forms the image of characters so similar to ourselves and our environment, which ultimately leads to the right effect. The effect of "hell, it's me to a certain extent" or "I had the same situation." And this effect became possible not only because of actors, but also because of history.
When watching a movie, it’s quite natural to feel like you’re in the theater, as Marriage Story is mostly “talking” to the audience rather than “showing” them. It is not the last time to say “bravo” to the screenwriter for such a masterful construction of dialogues, for such a life experience in almost every phrase of the character.
Often melodramas are sinful by the use of certain forbidden techniques that deliberately force the viewer to squeeze a tear for no apparent reason (or reason artificially caused). There are no such moments in this picture. The whole narrative is so organically and correctly that there is no sense of artificiality or falsity when viewed; "it could have been so in real life." Perhaps it is because of the “permanent life” the film at some point will seem a little long, and one hundred percent pleasure from watching can not be in the end.
Of course, “Marriage Story” is one of the best melodramas of late. An important advantage of the film is that it can be watched not only by those who “survived a divorce” or who just have a long family relationship. The message of the film will be clear to anyone who is in a relationship or who just understands what it is. I highly recommend this picture for viewing for emotional unloading.
The 2020 Oscar nominations came with no surprises. Most of the candidates are expected films and personalities. But some of them so much that nominated for the statuette twice: Scarlett Johansson was nominated for Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress.
Regardless of who will be awarded the Oscar, the actress decided the task for herself: she played great in a very good film “Marriage Story”. The Netflix project, directed by Noah Baumbuck, was first presented at the festival in Venice. Adam Driver and Scarlett Johansson then laughed a lot, laughed cheerfully and stared passionately at each other, and we, ordinary viewers waiting for a wide premiere, did not know what all this was about.
Despite the fact that the film is called “Marriage Story”, it, at first glance, rather represents the story of one divorce. Although, if you delve into the plot and semantic layers, it is, of course, the story of the family. Going through all the circles of hell during a divorce, dealing with custody of his son and arguing with lawyers, yet Charlie and Nicole manage to tell the story of their love. Probably, this is what so bribes in the film – the unshakable human basis of relations between normal people who have something to lose when a relationship breaks down. And this is certainly not an apartment, jointly acquired property or ambitions, but mutual trust, affection, shared memories and, of course, children whose lives also inevitably change with the divorce of their parents.
In Marriage Story, everyone will find a response to exactly those problems that concern him: the psychology of relationships, creative ambitions, relationships with relatives, legal jungles and moral boundaries that bloodthirsty lawyers cannot step over. Whichever way we approach the film, we will find a depth in this section, perhaps somewhat unexpected.
But in whatever aspect we consider this film, one thing is indisputable: close to perfect acting. Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver are not just convincingly playing spouses in a state of divorce. They seem to cease to be themselves. Therefore, the compassion of the audience becomes so strong that despite everything you wish the heroes a banal happy ending. And although you understand with your mind that it is impossible not only in their life circumstances, but also in the artistic logic of the picture itself, but you understand the film, as it turns out, not only with your mind, but also with your heart.
Noah Baumbak’s clever, sensual, emotional and rather tough painting combines such seemingly incompatible qualities. In addition, it maintains a gender balance in line with current trends - the story is revealed on both sides of this conflict. But still the artistic text (in the broad sense of the word) to some extent dictates the accents: if in terms of author's sympathies, the advantage goes towards Charlie - an obsessed artist, then the emotional advantage is on the side of Nicole - a sincere and brilliant actress. The director cannot stop admiring her, and not her appearance, which is familiar to Johansson, but the spiritual qualities and inner strength of the heroine.
A number of films, with which "Marriage Story" voluntarily or unwittingly enters into intertextual dialogue, are quite wide - from "Night" (1961) by Michelangelo Antonioni to "Divorce of Nader and Simin" (2011) by Asghar Farhadi, from "Kramer vs. Kramer" (1979) by Robert Benton to "Don't part with your loved ones" (1979) by Pavel Arsenov. The director brings to a new level not only divorce as a topic of artistic discourse, but also again addresses the problem of incommunicability, explored in the trilogy of alienation Antonioni.
"Marriage Story" is a slice of life. The viewer immerses himself in the story of director and screenwriter Noah Baumbuck, which was helped by Scarlett Johansson (Nicole Barber) and Adam Driver (Charlie Barber).
What's the plot? A couple goes through a divorce process. Throughout the tape, they go through difficult questions about custody, moving, accumulated feelings and unspoken words. You can’t say that the viewer will be able to find the culprit or the antagonist hero here, because there are none. Of course, we want to take sides, but just like in life, it’s not easy. That's the beauty of the painting. Slice by slice, layer by layer, we are experiencing a difficult life period of the heroes, although the whole story is actually a common case in life. It just happens and we have to move on.
It would seem that the banal hype, so why this picture claims to be a prestigious Oscar? Let's try to think. I didn't see any intense psychological drama, any wheezing in my throat. Maybe it’s because you want to think that everything will work out and the marriage will be saved. In the eyes of Nicole Barber throughout the film there is a feeling of love in Charlie, and their letters about each other, which open the film, make you understand that if there is no love between them, then at least they are very close to each other people. Their child, played by Egie Robertson, is the thread that holds Nicole and Charlie together. There's no big drama here, except for the one-on-one conversation in the middle of the movie, but there are elements of comedy.
All the action takes place in one warm color palette, the director often uses repetitive techniques and in general the film looks aesthetically and somehow chamberly, as if the viewer peeks into someone’s personal life. Long dialogues do not tire, but on the contrary help to understand the characters, but the main raisins are still in the game of Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver, that’s who you need to thank. These actors got so used to their roles that they pulled out the whole film, if you throw away all the secondary ones - they are two Atlanteans who hold the entire production on their shoulders.
There is not even any special morality here, except for the monologue that more is always required of a woman as a parent. And if at the beginning of the film, the viewer sees in the heroine Scarlett almost Mother Teresa and is ready to accuse Charlie Barber of the breakdown of the marriage, then the scales gradually change the situation. On these “swings”, the director rolls the entire film to the viewer, seasoning everything with light satire on the activities of lawyers and all the family law of America, while not letting the film slide into ordinary melodrama. Here’s what to expect from a tape that will take your 2 hours.
7 out of 10 for the film and 9/10 for playing two talented actors.
The work is fascinating from the first minutes. But a special like deserves the acting. That’s where you really look and forget about the other parts of the movie. What is the monologue of the heroine Scarlett Johansson during the first meeting with a lawyer! Bravo! I believe!
Adam Driver also gave his all. His character evokes a huge range of emotions: we start with neutral ones, move into irritation and dislike, end with sympathy and sympathy.
The film is extremely emotional and even has a share of positivity: there is also humor in the film. The way in which the dramatic transition from drama to comedy was masterfully orchestrated at some prices deserves the highest praise! Here you frown, watching as a strange aunt inspects the relationship between father and son, but already giggling, admiring how clumsy dad & #39; resting & #39; on the floor, almost unconscious. You do not have time to understand why suddenly laughed, because a minute ago & #39; Izzy & #39; hopeless drama!
I also want to highlight this point: the film is about a complicated divorce, but there are very few trials in court. We've been shown what happens to breakups before and after court hearings and conversations with lawyers. This is a step from love to hate.
To sum it up, I loved it! I watched the movie in one breath. Despite the sadness that permeates the whole plot, the picture came out quite light and without aftertaste.
“Family-law attorneys see good people on their worst behavior. Criminal attorneys see bad people on their best behavior. It’s impossible not to join Adam Driver’s tears as they watch the dialogue scene with his wife as they try to stop the “war” and negotiate, but realize that it’s too late and nothing will work. It’s hard to say which made the most impression: the amazing acting, the realistic production, or the fact that the theme of the film resonated with personal experiences. Probably the best movie of 2019 for me.
39 Every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. '
Cracks in relationships, problems of family destruction, the drama of divorce – these topics are increasingly flashing in our daily life, but can stories about divorce become banal? On the contrary, each of them is unique, each oozes pain, long experiences and a desire to preserve, not lose yourself and what was so dear to you when you first got married. What do we feel on the threshold of marriage, whether only bright hopes for a happy life with his chosen one, or hidden fears and anxiety – will this love be enough for all the life trials that lie ahead, or we rush into life together like a pool, and who will swim out – that’s good?
'Marriage story' director Noah Baumbak, shown in the competition program of the Venice Festival and recently released on the Netflix platform - this is a story with two voices, it is able to touch everyone alive and will not leave anyone indifferent. Told with feeling, slowly, she attracts the ability to present the story from different sides, because at first the couple seems quite harmonious: Charlie (Adam Driver) is a young, promising theater director from New York and his wife Nicole (Scarlett Johansson), a capable actress who at one time began her career on the set in Los Angeles. They have a close-knit, loving family, allowing them to share the responsibilities of the house and the care of eight-year-old son Henry, whom each of them loves very much.
And yet something happened or happened day in and day out, gradually destroying that idyll and leading to the breakdown of the relationship. Now it is difficult to say what was the first impetus for their destruction, whether it is a problem of sexism, gender differences in behavior in conflicts, a crisis of love or all of this, but something has gone, something important has gone, without returning, without which it is impossible to coexist under the same roof as before.
The film 'Marriage Story' filmed very intimately and chamberly, it as if step by step explores family history, which is required when dealing with such subtle matter as feelings, where the smallest falsehood will be immediately visible. The main characters, Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver, intertwined in the film in a brilliant duet and each perfectly plays his part, thanks to which a touching, lyrical story was obtained, which vibrates in unison with our feelings and clings to its life truth, when it is impossible not to feel sympathy for one, then the other side or all at once.
We must pay tribute, and the actors of the second plan very decently hold the bar: Laura Dern and Ray Liotta in the form of lawyers of competing parties enter into a serious fight, from which, it seems, just that dust and feathers will not fly. And they're playing it really hard!
However, for me, the most important thing in the film was his sincerity. 'Marriage story' does not moralize, does not talk about the ideal or the right choice, the film is completely different - about how important it is to reach each other in time, to hear the other side in a family conflict, to understand that although this is a different view, a different world, but he also has the right to be. We can hear this voice earlier and avoid losses, but even when heard late, it brings understanding and harmony into our lives: we can live in peace with each other!
Have a good view!
As paradoxical as it may sound, but there are films for once in a good sense of the word. Or, in other words, good movies for one viewing – you don’t want to watch it a second time – and in a year or ten. “Marriage Story” is just one of these: interesting, with a stunning play of charismatic actors, with well-written dialogues and script, and, in fact, a topic whose topicality may not go off the scale, but is quite relevant. However, an unpleasant aftertaste is inevitable. And after all, there are no minuses in the film - the first shots, the first lines and the way the plot itself twists is commendable. How Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver demonstrate their skill, playing perhaps their best roles to date - one delight. The plot unobtrusively drags you on, and the ending is as it should be. No amendment.
But this movie is not entertaining at all. No rest - one tension, discomfort and even humiliation from what he saw. Maybe I shouldn't have played that movie. The subject of marriage with its passions and the threat of divorce is initially boring (as if the title of the film can bring something other than boredom). There is also a marriage between two Americans. And given the fact that these two are creative people, then write at all is lost. Conflict is inevitable. Heroes also have a child. So, the film can be characterized by two different adjectives – boring and passionate. Also, the youngest character of the film wildly infuriated. Even against the background of stubborn parents who are not inferior to each other, the small harms of a single offspring look simply monstrous. This is the reason for the discomfort and nervousness, as well as the shame that you are an invisible witness to everything that happens on the screen. Even at the beginning of the film, you are afraid that at first the characters you like will show themselves in a way that will be ashamed for each of them.
The moral of this fable is that we need to talk to each other more and listen. So that it doesn't turn into a selfish "Let our lawyers talk about it."
Marriage Story ("Marriage Story") is a film that you don't want to recommend to others. The picture Noah Baumbak is able to amuse, touch and shame you in 2 hours, giving basic answers to fundamental questions.
This is a beautifully told story of a married couple whose marriage, after 10 years of living together, begins to crack at the seams due to the traditional conventions of the relationship.
The cornerstone here is the personality of a person, namely identity and self-determination, which gradually fade into the background in life together.
Because in the family, the personal “I” is replaced by the collective “We”, which does not call us to internal rebellion, while each of the partners in the first years of marriage is under the care of such ephemeral concepts as falling in love and passion, hiding from the impending reality.
Marriage is always evolving. People grow up in marriage, get to know each other better, but also themselves. Sooner or later, everyone thinks about his place in this play of life, what his role is, how significant it is.
The curse and beauty is that we are all a priori different. Accordingly, as time passes, we begin to think that our lives, both personal and professional, are not as we would like. Of course, there are questions. Lots of questions. They're snowballing. We are so much afraid of losing a loved one that in captivity of fear we try to protect him from our experiences. Trying to digest this bile in ourselves, only more poison the soul. Giving up good intentions, we do not notice how we betray the most valuable resource that a loved one gives – trust.
Marriage is not just an imaginary desire to be together for the rest of your life. No two people are alike. We change for each other. Marriage is a sacrifice on both sides. Somewhere inspiring, somewhere necessary, but it is always aimed at someone who we care about. It is not a loss of identity, but a transformation of personality. It’s the realization that the world doesn’t just revolve around you. A man will never do anything by force, transgressing his principles. We change because we love.
The main characters of the film, Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) and Charlie (Adam Driver), seemingly happy in marriage. He is an ambitious theater director in New York. She is a talented actress who plays in her husband’s theater. They also have a favorite 8-year-old son, Henry. They know why they love each other. However, everything goes to hell, when the increased ambitions of one and the professional stability of the other collide in the way.
Wishing for a better life for each other, personal interests are promoted, which inevitably sows the seeds of discord. Habitual things cause dislike, and any phrase spoken is distrust, which leads the characters to divorce. Wanting to protect themselves, they let lawyers into their lives, who build a wall of misunderstanding between them, erecting into the catastrophic absolute any carelessly thrown word or barely noticeable trifle.
In the end, the heroes will come to the realization that breaking is not building. The idea is to understand and learn. Marriage should not be seen as an obstacle to self-development. Marriage is the trust with which an important aspect of a relationship is forged: love. To do this, it is important to talk to each other, to want and be able to listen and hear. Marriage history is a valuable experience that answers the main question – there is no point in life that we would not like to fix. It just means you haven’t lost anything yet.
'History' the good thing is that it is almost realism, I am a fan of Italian neorealism and in films appreciate meeting this criterion. Minimum theatricality, lack of pomposity and pretentious moralistic speeches from heroes of the type ' intelligent man, oracle' through which the main message of creation is conveyed to the viewer, well, suddenly the viewers are stupid and misunderstand something. The creators of this film respect and trust the viewer to delve into the essence of the love and life stories of the heroes, try to draw their conclusions and give everyone the right to catch their meanings, to see this typical story in their own and new ways. I'm hooked. The old theme of how really close and close to each other, smart, kind, talented people manage not to hear, the one who is nearby and, ultimately, themselves.
And in order for sure and finally not to hear his neighbor and, God forbid, to retreat from his stubborn decision to crush everything and forgive nothing, they involve heavy artillery - oh, horror! lawyers! And then begins a completely inappropriate development of events, all the most important, vitally important fades into the background, begins ' Battle of the Titans' from the legal profession. The figures of the main characters seem to be small, they seem to be not important at all, are not interesting to anyone; their lawyers certainly do not care about the happiness of the family, the child, these are such trifles compared to lawyer ambitions and prestige. I watched with horror what the defenders of interests were doing ' with the thoughts, feelings, lives of Nicole and Charlie who trusted them ( Laura Dern is especially predatory in the role of a prestigious lawyer). I wanted to shout: What are you doing with your lives? Why are you so obstinately and persistently reluctant to stop and try to hear yourself and others? And it all started when Nicole refused to read the list of positive qualities of Charlie, refused, afraid that the list listed on this list is so huge and important that it would devalue all her claims and ambitions, because is this not what we are looking for in the companion for life? But the chance was lost... And the chance was clearly, it is evident by the emotions of the ex-spouses in the finale of the film, when Charlie comes across this list. I may be wrong, but I felt this film in a way that was consistent with my values and attitudes.
Of the disadvantages, I would call small, in my opinion, the protractedness and monotony of the film. And now, I have developed an indifferent relationship with the main characters, namely, indifferent, neither Nicole nor Charlie caused neither sympathy nor antipathy. Although, perhaps for the best, it did not prevent me from watching from the outside, not taking sides.
Incredibly colorful, full of emotional speeches, funny and at the same time tragic situations, with a truly theatrical, as if close to the audience the game of all actors without exception, “Marriage Story” is almost unable to leave indifferent the sentimental viewer.
Difficulties of family life, marital conflicts, divorce process - these issues are always relevant for cinema at different times have become the subject of research by directors of various suits and genres.
“Divorce in Italian”, “Scenes from married life”, “Kramer vs. Kramer”, “Do not part with your loved ones”, “War of the Roses”, “The Road of Change”, “Divorce of Nader and Simin”, “Divorce in the Big City” – what other topic has brought to life so many diverse in form and content, but at the same time widely known and beloved by many paintings?
Here, it seems, it was simply impossible to invent and shoot something new and exciting. But Noah Baumbak not only succeeded in doing this, but managed to do it freshly, ironically and non-trivially.
I think I can even understand people who didn’t like this movie. Like the professional activities of the main characters, which takes place on the stage, the story of their divorce, shown in the film, also appears as a kind of theatrical production. Sometimes it seems that Charlie and Nicole are just playing with us, the audience.
For most of the film, they look like an almost perfect couple. They even have similar facial features and manner of speaking! The undoubted merit of the creators of the picture is in the brilliant selection of actors for the main roles and in their incredible compatibility.
They even have lawyers – the same bitches and sharks, ready, smiling, to tear their opponent apart! And again I note the excellent selection of actors and their equally incredible similarity.
Where are the insoluble contradictions between the heroes? Where did Shakespeare’s passions suddenly appear on the screen between two people who seemed so warm to each other? Is it because of the desire for creative self-realization and professional selfishness of each of the characters? At first glance, little, too little. The main characters even letters about each other at the time of separation look like a declaration of love.
However, what seems unreal and insignificant to many of us is quite different for creative, impulsive and not too adult natures. After all, in fact, the film Baumback is a movie about two beautiful and gifted children of about 30 years old, whose eight-year-old son sometimes looks much more reasonable and natural than themselves.
Perhaps, if someone like Charlie’s first lawyer, played by 82-year-old Alan Alda, were always with them, he would help the children grow up, learn to listen and hear each other and overcome family difficulties that do not seem intractable.
But the world that Baumbuck demonstrates in his film, unfortunately, consists mainly of the same egoists (lawyers Nora and Jay) and high-aged children (Mother Nicole or girlfriend Charlie), who are more likely to allow the main characters to become participants in the next tragicomic misian scenes than help solve family problems.
Unlike the minors Maisie and Billy from Divorce in the City and Kramer vs. Kramer, the main victims of the family conflict here are not even a child, but Charlie and Nicole themselves, who, like young children, are doomed to doubt the correctness of the choice made for the rest of their lives and continue to analyze their feelings for each other.
Their son Henry, reading a letter to his mother about his father, seems quite capable in the future not to repeat the mistakes of his parents, but the story of Charlie and Nicole does not look complete, despite all the unpleasant words of the main character to his wife and her choice. Too much unites the former spouses, so that their divorce does not resemble intermission in a phantasmagorical and ready to open a new exciting action theatrical premiere.
Baumbuck and the actors created here a real extravaganza of feelings and emotions, as if addressing the viewer with the words of W. Shakespeare: If you have tears, prepare to shed them. But sitting in front of the screen, do not rush to get out the headscarves: you may have much more reasons to laugh at this story along with its cute but hapless heroes.
The secret of this film is simple: relevance. Noah Baumbach takes on the immersion in the world of American divorce and literally pulls the viewer. Along the way, touching such important flags as the emotional state of the spouses, the relationship with children, domestic violence, work and money. The cherry on the cake is the work of lawyers. Here the authors allowed themselves to pour out all the bile, inviting three quite famous actors - Ray Liotta, Laura Dern and Alan Alda. Each of them is depicted caricatured, whiplashy, which, however, never spoils the overall impression of the tape.
It came out multidimensionally, because each viewer here can afford to see something close to his worldview. I am sure that many will be fascinated to watch how heroically the father of the family tries to resist the obvious and overt aggression from his wife, who initiated the whole action. Here it is time to recall quotes from 'Kramer vs. Kramer'.
However, for many viewers, a completely different source of inspiration is offered. Scarlett's few close-ups with lengthy monologues flip the whole game to some extent. And the point is not so much in the revelations themselves, but in the combination of confident acting technique with the brilliant camera work of Robbie Ryan (by the way, the cameraman Ken Loach). It turns out something in the style of Ingmar Bergman, which should certainly be counted in the collection of major successes for Scarlett.
At the same time, the film itself is furnished without much pathos. Just a little story of two ordinary people getting divorced. Everything is banal and simple, just like in the last works of Woody Allen (whose works of different periods, one way or another, appear throughout the film in the form of direct or indirect quotes).
But in all this, you can see a black comedy, if you take as a starting point the denunciation of lawyers.
That's enough to watch. And even considering the unpretentiousness (if not lightness) of this work, this viewing of this film will most likely not leave a variety of viewers indifferent. And considering ' Eternity' themes, it is quite possible to assume both significant prizes and a long life of the tape after a wide release.
What to say is great.
More recently, a few days after Martin Scorsese’s The Irishman, Netflix released perhaps the second most important picture of the year for the streaming service – Noah Baumbach’s Marriage Story. The mass audience with the work of Baumbach is hardly familiar. Among his directorial projects, the most famous are: Squid and the Cat (Baumbach's only Oscar nomination for Best Original Screenplay), The Story of the Myrowitz Family and Sweet Francis. Screenplays include The Incomparable Mr. Fox in collaboration with Wes Anderson and the third Madagascar. And this year, Baumbach writes and directs Marriage Story, probably his main work to date. The film premiered at the Venice Film Festival, but the jury did not choose the winner in any of the categories of the main competition. However, in the award season, Marriage Story has more chances. What made the film competitive against the backdrop of other significant films of the year and why the tape is so vividly reflected in the hearts of the audience? Let's work it out together.
The opening scene of “Marriage Story” gracefully introduces the viewer to the main characters, the married couple – Charlie (Adam Driver) and Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) – through each other’s eyes. Nicole is an attentive, courageous, sensitive girl who grew up in Los Angeles and became a theater actress, loving her son and constantly losing to board games. In turn, Charlie is a true New Yorker, a talented theater director who almost does not care about other people’s opinions, he is neat, frugal, often cries, loves to be a father. This is no coincidence: they were asked by a psychologist working to stabilize their complex relationships. But this does not help - Nicole wants a divorce and moves with his son to Los Angeles to his mother, where the most difficult divorce process begins, which enormously affects their lives and work.
In the history of cinema, there are at least three pillars of cinema about family difficulties and the resulting divorce proceedings. These are Ingmar Bergman’s Scenes of Marriage, Robert Benton’s Kramer vs. Kramer and Asghar Farhadi’s Divorce of Nader and Simin – three partially similar family tragedies – masterpieces of world cinema, on which Marriage Story rests, like a three-whale Earth. But with a more detailed study of Baumbach’s biography, one can get a comprehensive answer to the questions: how was this statement born and on what, in addition to the “three whales”, was based? From the very first school lessons of literature, we were laid with the ability and need to separate the author from the lyrical hero, which is, in fact, a complexly organized mask of the author himself. Baumbach was married to actress Jennifer Jason Lee for five years, after which the actress filed for divorce in 2010. The process lasted three difficult years, during which the director managed to establish a relationship with Greta Gerwig, a successful actress who later became a director. Such “underwear” is very important for understanding “Marriage Story”, filled to the top with both of Baumbach’s relationships, making it an incredibly personal and self-analytical tape. Perhaps that is why many who have already seen the picture, note its emotionality and honesty.
In Marriage Story, Baumbach tries to find the point of no return, gradually introducing new difficulties, facts, errors into the story and script, as if a child was building a house of cards and nervously waiting for it to collapse. He asks: When did the heroes cross the line? Who's to blame? What if everything was predetermined by their character and their unwillingness to change? Where is the turning point they missed, or perhaps it is smeared in time? The film offers the viewer a study of several such points, each time adding emotional firewood to the fire of marital disagreement.
... and now it has come to the lawyers, rattling their armor and weapons in court, like in a video game. These armor and weapons clearly resent the heroes, cause real discomfort, make them try to engage in dialogue. In the final dialogue, crushing all hopes for a joint future. Here comes the absolutely best scene of the film: the spark of that very hope flares up, but in the end leads not to a passionate fire that warms the soul of both, but to an unthinkable conflagration that incinerates the family. In this scene, both Johansson and Driver show outstanding acting performance, especially Driver. This becomes possible thanks to the overall well-coordinated and thoughtful work of the creators: Baumbach creates conditions, carefully brings the characters to this scene, the operator Robbie Ryan shoots the scene in one take, without breaking the audience’s attention, and the soothing minimalist beige background and background of the scene allows you to vividly feel and feel its essence – a kind of contrast of visual and script, glaze and emotions.
But, in addition to this ingenious scene and the problematics that precipitate it, Baumbach also talks about a departure from the patriarchy. With the help of the heroine Scarlett Johansson, he briefly sketches the institutional path along which society moves. The tape is ascetic in everything except emotions: interiors, camera work, installation. This allows you to be alone with the characters and their difficulties, paying attention to every gesture, every look, and throughout the length of the picture to feel the above (at the end of the previous paragraph) contrast.
The main burden still falls on the actors who not only adequately performed their roles, but showed why they are in demand today. This is especially true of Adam Driver. There is a strong feeling that he can on the screen everything – he can be different. Right now, Driver is one of the most popular actors of the generation. And for his character Baumbach allocates a separate scene in the finale, before the epilogue, which once again proves the autobiographical picture. Through the mouth of the hero Driver, in his aria, the director allegedly sums up the life stage, realizes mistakes and brings to the viewer’s judgment his own, acquired with experience understanding of the essence of love. And the epilogue in its content is reminiscent of Laland: it places accents and puts the final point of the film, stating the importance of everything that happens in human life, once again confirming the correctness of the phrase: “Everything that is done, everything is for the better.”
9 out of 10