I learned about this film after watching “Colette” through a selection of similar plot paintings. I was very interested in the description, the trailer, and the fact that the film was made by the British and the Swedes. Of course, casting was the icing on the cake. For some reason, I have a preconception that Glenn Close will not star in passing films, and in general this one cannot be called such, but, unfortunately, the director, it seems to me, did not bring it to the end.
What I liked:
The film touches on very interesting topics for me personally. First of all, it is the personal life of older people. After all, we are probably the first generation that knows that it is unlikely that in old age we will be enough to go to the cottage and bake cakes. I want to live actively, dress well, communicate, not lose anything that you have now. This is the way of life that is shown in this film. The main characters live in a beautiful apartment, tastefully dress, they have hobbies (besides caring for children and grandchildren) and personal interests, they flirt with each other and even make love. Although all this is embellished (it is clear that most pensioners do not live like this), it still creates a very encouraging impression and some pleasant visual picture of old age. The second is the issue of women’s emancipation. It is often said, “Compare how many great men there are and how many women there are!” Women are less talented! Of course it's not. And the film, which at first may seem to speak of the notorious “behind every great man is a great woman,” shows that even relatively recently, back in the 60s, women had far more obstacles to success, despite their talents and ambitions. Although the film is not based on real events, but it makes you think: What if the main character did not marry this man? What if her husband was not a like-minded colleague with whom you can speak the same language, but an ordinary man, like most other, real women? And how many of these women did not have the opportunity to dare, share their ideas, find a way to make them a reality (albeit in the way that is presented in the film). This topic is quite delicate, and does not cause irritation, which happens when the feminist agenda is presented too straightforward (unless the replica of the writer-colleague from the flashback seems too clumsy). It was also interesting to see what the Nobel Prize kitchen looked like. It is clear that what is shown in Wife is not something absolutely reliable, but this side of life is partially revealed to you. Dmitri Muratov will probably be given it in the same way.
I didn't like it.
Glenn Close's character is too perfect. She is reserved, patient, polite, she always has a very calm and noble expression on her face. It seems that this character never makes mistakes. at first, of course, it attracts sympathy, but then begins to tire. Such a hero becomes uninteresting to look at, especially robot-like in this respect I thought the heroine in her youth. But the scene where she leaves the gala evening, just seemed unrealistic. This is where Joan would hardly lose face, given the respectable and innocent people sitting next to her. Her husband is much more complicated. Yes, he’s more of a negative hero here, but you really want to look at him, you don’t know how he’ll behave in a given situation. During the film you recognize him as a person, and about Joan learn only the facts of the biography. The role of the photographer was unclear. You don't believe that a young girl will stick to her grandfather for no reason and then suddenly change her attitude. It would be more realistic to take on the role of an older person, and through this it would not be obvious to touch on another interesting topic. But most importantly, I was completely discouraged by the sharp, ragged ending. It would seem that there will be a climax, but the author preferred to make the final open. Because of this, the game of Christian Slater and the son of the main characters immediately smeared. They were not allowed to reveal themselves, deprived of their story completeness. Seriously, I wasn’t looking at the timing and I was rolling my lip to see what happened next, but the movie was over. The tension at the beginning of the film did not correspond to its finale. As if you were expecting to watch a movie after the trailer, but it turned out that the trailer was a movie.
6 out of 10
For his attempt and aesthetic delight in contemplation by Glenn Close.
(Camera shoots from above, beautiful box)
The film is generally good. The duo of Glenn Close (Joan) and Jonathan Price (Joe) came out wonderful, delighted by the sometimes popping Christian Slater. And the film does an important thing, makes you think, but thereby condemns yourself to logical questions.
(Camera captures contents - broken vase)
A simple story about a brilliant writer Joan who writes books for her husband and no one knows about it. And she's been doing it for 30 years. And the fact is that in the 60s she did not want to take risks, she was afraid that her work would be dusty on the shelves or never come out. It could have been an obstacle in those days, I understand.
And now she begins to help with the writing of her incompetent husband. The books are published under his name. And this goes on for years, until they are informed that Joe has passed the Nobel Prize in literature. Here the true emotions of Joan show the viewer.
It turned out she was terribly unhappy because of the deception that she invented! Where were you before? I understand that by telling the truth to the public, Joe's career would have been destroyed forever, but you could have just walked away from him, stopped writing. He didn't force her, and I don't think Joe is the asshole who killed the girl. They wanted to show that she was a genius locked in a cage - it was stupid.
There's no way to talk over the years, is there? It seems that she never once expressed her opinion and pain about this. He thought she was happy and what was the problem?
I understand the problems of inequality, and as I read the reviews, people see a feminist orientation in this picture. However, except in the 60s, this topic plays no role anymore. Then the gender does not matter at all, the usual household and unnecessary self-sacrifice begin.
There is a saying that behind every successful man is a strong woman. What is the price of such self-sacrifice? What's going on in a woman like that? When she says, "Enough!" The answers to these questions you will find in the beautiful game of Glenn Close, who, in the fertile soil of her talent, nurtured the talentless literary sprouts of her husband. The wife who makes kings!
A damn good movie If we abstract from the topic disclosed in the opinion of many previously expressed topics ' ghost writers' or ' literary slaves' (word to the letter 'H' we will not mention it), from associations with 'Big Eyes' T. Burton, etc., in fact, the game of actors remains. It is the latter that is the key factor to say: 'Devil's nice film'. The crisis of scripts in general and good stories, in particular, ' fledgling' a generation of young actors (talented, of course, but flat and one-sided in revealing their characters, for the most part), the dominance of the so beloved by our lazy brain ' active' (action) filmmaking - all this encourages you to look for something real, real stories of real people. ' Wife' in this case, in my opinion, should not be perceived solely as some statement on a topical topic. It should go down in the history of cinema, as a textbook, a clear example of how an ordinary (what a sin to conceal) plot is presented by real actors (of course, we are talking primarily about G. Close). As in the film industry, it’s also hard to find something worthwhile, something real, something high-artistic in contemporary literature. But that's another story altogether. . . 8 out of 10 Followers of Stanislavsky and those who are tired of wow effects. Original
I got the title of the movie. The film is praised, it is about the family, not often there are good, and even about the wife. Wife in the family by definition in second roles, something about her will tell and show?
The film of 2017, so just join the positive assessment of the work of all: the script is convincing, the artists are wonderful (dark color, costumes heroine-sk-u-ch-no! everything is boring, as befits a good family with history). And outside the window of a dark hotel room - a clear bright square of a day that is not. The music is inaudible, and the play of the main characters is brilliant!
The second role is something like ' second grade' but in this direction we will not move, think of something about some similarity of names or walnut.
Or you can read the novel to accept the fact that Joan was really afraid not to break into the world of literature.
So, the two found each other, started a family, got married (and Joan didn’t, if possible, despise the child that Joe left her). They protected and supported each other all their lives. They gave birth and raised two children. They made it to their grandchildren. They won the Nobel Prize. A very thin boat of life (' We were printed!') turned into a shining liner (' I was given a Nobel!') He already has a biographer. Plus... plus... plus... plus... What's the matter?!
The film is a true exploration of the inner life of a family that is deeply hidden from prying eyes. It's personally instructive and socially important.
The family is the fundamental basis of life, now it is in crisis, it seems even disappearing, but it lives! What and how?
So, the family rebelled against her husband almost perfect wife. Husband's fault? Let’s take a closer look: where did they make the first false move? No, not where Joan became 'help' Joe, and where she ' took away' husband from not too strong family, and he did not really resist ... Both are too flexible in morals and ethics, in their thirst for success and family stability in a world that has not yet forgotten the horrors of the last war.
Then the lie entered their lives and became, with time, the second life of their husband. And wives! This is a huge, constant tension. 'Don't lie and you won't have to remember anything' Mark Twain.
The second mistake is a kind of family castling. And here he is, a celebrity, and she...
She is a wise woman and should have known that the position of a woman in society is determined by her husband. If his status is higher - wife ' pulled up' to his level.
On the contrary, the husband takes the place of his wife. That's right. Which happened. With her consent. She has no right to a family rebellion. What is it?
She, apparently, long ago realized that she became a literary slave & #39; this is quite common and, as a woman, adapted to her role, hard work building her personality in rather stifling, but also creative, circumstances.
Joe? Traditional male contacts with society and non-traditional concerns about family life and raising children fall on Joe. There is a dynamic, because of this he lives. No creativity. Whoever stands still moves backwards. It is degraded and emptied, their lifelines diverge. And she suddenly sees it.
('I won a Nobel!''Your wife won the Nobel Prize!')
It is ' broken '.
Very humanly, they manage to tell each other a lot ' honest but inappropriate'. 39 All brides are angels, where do witch wives come from? Answer: That's how husbands make them. '
And we should say words of kindness, mercy, forgiveness, compassion, care. You should know your age, accept another as he is, because you made him as he is. They understand this late, do they?
We all know that Joan is a very strong woman. She, in fact, ' broke' Joe. She's gonna record that family thriller. She's a widow. This is her liner flying into the pink sky. She is very self-conscious, communicates normally, her son accepts her prescribed limits, and she simply puts her biographer in her place & #39; These are her first independent decisions. This is the life she almost missed.
Her world has changed, but the world around her has also changed, she will not immediately, without us, understand that her husband, her husband, was her shield before the world.
Because there's a third mistake, just her. My wife shouldn't have gone anywhere, not even after Nobel. She had to sit at home, be with her daughter, wait for the birth of her grandson, discover the role of grandmother and continue the family saga. . .
You can’t have everything in life at once! Especially in the family. . .
But you can not show family people the boredom of family life. It (boring) is inevitable, it is the flip side of adjustment, it is necessary for recovery. But in the cinema - unbearable!
There will be no second viewing, for sure.
Old as the world story about a brilliant person, confused and helpless, and his faithful companion, responsible and caring. But what if this union, tested over the years, is not based on what it seems?
From the first minutes of the film, attention is focused on the heroine Glenn Close. Stylish, well-groomed woman, with an incredibly sharp mind and fresh, despite her age, look. By the middle of the picture, you unwittingly catch yourself thinking that this is an exemplary old age. The one to strive for. For the selection of the leading actress and acting - "excellent".
This is not to say that other characters are weaker. But they're just the background. However, the number of awards that Glenn Close was nominated for after this role speaks for itself.
European cinema is always distinguished by the nobility of the picture and the plot. It does not seek box office fees and outrage. Thinking and seeing for those who can see. "Wife" is no exception. And given the fact that the script is based on the novel of the same name by Meg Wolitzer, it is not necessary to wait for easy understandable emotions and simple-minded dialogues.
The film can not be called action-packed or exciting, and this is not necessary. Just a quality, leisurely drama, and this is its value for film art. The finale of the picture is more than natural, but still disappointed. Accustomed to action mind demanded a coup, maybe even scandalous outcome. But it all ended exactly as it should have ended.
1993. Writer Joseph Castelman learns that he is going to be awarded the Nobel Prize in literature and together with his wife Joan and son David arrives in Stockholm. Everyone sings praises to Joseph, but no one knows that his quiet and reserved wife is involved in the birth of all his works, being a much more talented writer. And for the love of this unworthy man, who did not disdain numerous betrayals, Joan not only buried her potentially brilliant career, but to this day continues to hide their common secret, secretly hoping that Joseph will one day realize the sacrifice she made for him.
Glenn Close is certainly a talent, and looking at most of her roles, you realize that she will easily decorate even frankly passing pictures with her presence. So it happened with the role in the English-language debut of Swedish director Björn Runge, based on the novel by Meg Wolitzer - choosing a perfectly suitable manner of playing on restrained halftones, Close with one eye is able to perfectly paint a portrait of a woman who for years built a wall around her real feelings, desires and aspirations, only sometimes allowing them to slip out so that almost no one notices. But the fact is that her heroine seems to have no other emotions, although this is not the fault of the actress at all, since the moments where she can turn around and give her Joan a much larger volume are practically not prescribed.
Who is to blame for the film’s weakness is screenwriter Jane Anderson and the director himself, for they have done very little to make the movie anything more than a chamber feminist slogan. For starters, flashbacks depicting characters in their youth are simply superfluous - they do not give any additional touches to the images of adults Joseph and Joan and do not play a big role, but they knock off the rhythm. Directing, too, is far from grace when, after subtle, minimalistic, nobility-filled scenes, Runge moves on to uglyly staged emotional elucidations of relationships with waving hands and hurling surrounding objects.
The overly convex agitation about the infringed rights of women writers in the context of current events produces some strange and even contradictory effect, once you analyze the conflict a little deeper. The inner rebellion of the heroine against her husband, thanks to most scenes, especially the final ones, looks almost meaningless: if a woman begins to explain her position and say how tired she is of all this and it is time to finish everything, as immediately there is some circumstance that instantly calms her and returns the situation to its original position. If the authors of the picture were going to justify her behavior “dog on a leash” with love, devotion and respect, then what caused such a humiliating attachment to her husband, even in flashbacks once again depicted as a walking, narcissistic egoist and a bad writer, did not convincingly explain, moreover, even Joan herself could not answer this question. Added to everything else is her self-deception, self-doubt and masochistic voluntary dependence on a man – a strange combination for a woman claimed as the personification of a woman’s power. Of course, the Golden Globe, as well as a weighty pack of nominations for solid awards, Close deserved. But still in her biography there were works and stronger, and for a really loud film manifesto, it is not enough just to raise the problem - it must also be disclosed as brightly as possible, and the creators of "Wives" almost failed.
6 out of 10
On the fronts of pop holivars cannonade never subsides. So, are we breaking? No, the Swedes don't bend. So Bjørn Runge shot. Fem mortar. A film about the brilliant wife of a mediocre husband.
There are no capitulations in media wars. The audience is entertained by leisure trolling - why give up? Hype is always fueled by a bunch of drive freaks, on both sides - they know they're right. They are only right in wanting to respect themselves. And the obedient mass cult will always invent and give a reason. Therefore, in the films, because of the puddle, the American soldier will continue to victoriously beat the fascists, and in the cinema from the near outskirts, the claps will endlessly and “residually” smash an unknown horde. Until they find real reasons to respect themselves.
Why did the feminine self-awareness suddenly find itself in an equally flawed freak role? How did it happen that in one year there were two Siamese similar films about the unprecedented talent of writers who are married to plagiarists (the second - "He and her)?"
Rarely where else does the phrase “he wrote a book” sound with such provincial aspiration as in the land of monetized time. Once there aborigines with a similar feeling stared at glass beads. It might seem nice. The funny thing is that the number of writers born in Hollywood is about to exceed the number of readers there. Writing is a characteristic fetish of a semi-literate nation.
And when the subject of marital division becomes literary authorship, it should be understood as a swing on the holy. Trained to read and write, suffragettes storm the last stronghold of male intellectualism! I'd give up. Especially since you can write in captivity.
In the film in such captivity was just the heroine. But if the conditions of its content seem to suit, then fame is acutely lacking. She's trying to rebel. However, under the yoke of family circumstances and any feelings, retreats.
This is it. Cinema mixes male identity through the circumcision of the main sexual attribute – male brains. They are implanted, just like fillers, into soft female forms. Make it more beautiful.
This may not be the most boring movie. But it's so fake... The desire to equalize, trim, roll up all the irregularities and lacunae that distinguish one sex from another is such an obvious path of degeneration that if one has to prove it, then perhaps one does not need to do it anymore.
The film is certainly worthy of attention because it makes you think about what you wanted to expose in front of the viewer / reader, and what to hide. At first glance, the heroine Glenn Close at the very beginning understands that the path to writing is closed to her because of gender prejudices, and talent requires implementation. Then, perhaps unconsciously, and then very consciously, she finds the object in the person of an ambitious lustful professor. Everything seems to be on the surface: joint work, joint successes, backed by love, but in fact, multilevel manipulation.
And so, when the award was received, illustrating the author's recognition in the highest circles of society, Everest was conquered, and then what? The object of manipulation is no longer interesting.
Throughout the film, I kept thinking: Why is my son here? Such an uninteresting, colorless character who didn't even break a chair in a bar after the biographer's revelations. And so in the final scene, it becomes clear that the heroine will not publish under her own name, but there is another person who could well, say, inherit the manner of writing.
Glenn Close did the part, that's all, but I think she tried really hard. Although, judging by the reviews, her efforts were not wasted: most saw her as a victim.
10 out of 10
The movie The Wife immediately caught my attention. First an interesting plot, then - and the desire to see the best (according to critics) role of Glenn Close. It was not possible to get to the cinema... Watch the film managed only recently, after which it is impossible not to agree with the assurances of critics!
The 90s. The famous writer Joe Castleman was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature. This award is the pinnacle of the writer’s ambitions. Almost everyone accepts this award positively. Everyone except his wife Joan. During a trip to Stockholm, Joan remembers her life, her marriage to Joe, for which she sacrificed her ambitions, talent, leaving her husband in the shadow. At the same time, one journalist, having studied Joe’s early works, tells Joan an interesting point of view about the true authorship of Castleman’s works.
I thought the whole movie was based on a play. It often seemed that everything was happening on stage and you can see theatrical stage, soffits and massive curtains. Why exactly the play - it is felt due to the intimacy of what is happening, the conflict is concluded only between two characters, everything even happens within 2-3 days (flashbacks do not count). And in my opinion, such theatricality is good for cinema. After all, this is a film about people, their problems and their past, and such films should be so calm, peaceful, where passions rage only in scenes of quarrels and rare skirmishes, which immediately give way to something incredibly joyful. . .
In films like this, everything focuses on the characters, their characters, their stories, how they develop, and most importantly, on the actors who embody the characters. The film is not for nothing called the Wife, because Joan Castleman is the central heroine of the plot. Others see her as the perfect wife of a great writer, who always supports him and helps him in everything. But almost no one knows what sacrifices Joan went for her husband, that she literally laid down her life for his career, stepped aside, gave up writing ambitions, turning a blind eye to the affairs of her husband and condescending views of others. And despite all this, Joan still stands beside her husband with that cute smile, kind eyes that give her an aura of mystery and mystery, when you almost never understand what this incredible woman is thinking? After awarding the Nobel Prize to her husband, we can observe a whole kaleidoscope of emotions of the main character - fatigue from constant indulgence, from excessive and tiresome attention of her husband, despair and anger. Fantasticly phenomenal game Glenn Close without a doubt deserves all the praises and awards - it just can not but admire!
Close’s partner was no less eminent actor Jonathan Price, who played writer Joe Castleman. Joe isn’t as powerful and imposing as Joan, but I suspect that’s what was intended. To show how dependent Joan is on her support, care and help. And he knows that, and he never stops thanking her, even when she asks him to do the opposite. It is equally fascinating to watch the young heroes in the flashback series, where Joe and Joan played Harry Lloyd and Annie Stark - the dynamics of their relationship is interesting at any age.
A wife is a movie of people and relationships where the action focuses more on the characters. I have noticed that lately I am more interested in watching the characters - to see how they behave in a particular situation. That's why I liked the movie The Wife.
Glenn Close, which with almost one hundred percent probability was called the next winner at the Oscars in the nomination of the best female role, the role itself was given with dignity, but few film critics experienced identical delight for the film Bjern Runge in general.
The tape "Woman" can be perceived from two sides - it is either a hidden subtext aimed at gender discrimination, present in the circles of the Nobel Prize, which does not yet have reliable evidence, but only deplorable statistics for the weaker sex, or it is just a story that simply has not been fully disclosed. In any case, "The Wife" leaves many questions about whether the film is up to that level in order to compete openly with "Roma" or "The Favourite" in the number of nominations.
Fortunately, the risk academicians did not, and gave way to the tape where there is more or less agreement of all parties – namely the nomination Glenn Close. The actress most of the film is inferior in the number of dialogues to her actor-partner on the set, and husband-partner in history – Jonathan Price. The story tells of a mystery that can be seen after seeing the trailer, but the potential for family conspiracy has remained completely undiscovered. Moreover, lying on the bed in the final scenes, the main character asks a question to his wife, to which neither the director nor even the story itself gives an answer.
Hence comes the idea that the director did not find the right words to give his tape a clearer shape, the wife-gray cardinal works only until the moment when the couple begin to figure out a long-term relationship, excluding any meaning in the lived several decades of life together. The result is a worthy game by Glenn Close, and the unfulfilled potential of the story.
5 out of 10
' Wife' - a picture raising the problem, which remains very relevant in the second half of the zero. Gender inequality is still present in all areas of our lives, as men from time immemorial were considered smarter, more responsible and more respectable than fickle women. ' Wife' goes beyond all the clichéd films (and there are many of them, believe me) that call on women to act, no, it shows us a picture of voluntary inequality, a kind of typical female sacrifice, which many commit and for which, after a while, they have to pay either with pride or conscience.
The creative tandem performed by Glenn Close and Jonathan Price came out very organic. A wife who gave her laurels to please her husband, for the sake of love who has long passed, and a husband who basks in the glory. The audience is presented with a very ordinary picture - as a rule, creative people are not able to be in a long-term relationship, but here the story is not about competition, and ' team & #39; work.
Jealousy and shame are the two main feelings that appear in each frame. This is the torment of two deeply elderly people who are frankly striking.
Pleasant in the course of the narrative were flashbacks, telling about the acquaintance of the couple. Harry Lloyd in a short screen time was able to clearly convey both the character and his wanderings - what made him the way we see him at the very beginning of the picture.
The film is very dynamic, looks easy despite some rough cuts. And his message, in my opinion, everyone will understand differently. For someone it will be 'All the secret sooner or later becomes clear', and for someone ' Family first ', one thing remains true - this is a strong female character, which is impeccably conveyed by Glenn Close.
I think the film ' Wife' it’s worth watching every girl to look at herself from the outside. He is intense and inspiring, that is, the kind that is not sorry to spend an hour and a half of time on.
During the questionnaire to the question “Who are you by profession?” Agatha Christie used to say, "Woman." It is this word, which was the title of the film Björn Runge, can push to view this creation. There is something proud, loud in this title. There is a challenge and irony and a subtle touch of patience. For someone, only the title can replace the trailer and the description of the film (the creation of which, by the way, it is time to negate or great to revise in favor of the same films). It became even interesting, would the audience interest the film under the concise title "Husband"?. .
The film delicately drags on with a slow, soft narrative. The film will make every attempt to make the viewer – both outraged and admired. The film can even force you to turn it off or pause in favor of a break, because the scenes of the showdowns are played by the main actors so realistically that episodes from your life immediately pop up in your head - whether it is a showdown between spouses living next door, whether it is a quarrel between aunts and uncles who came to visit, and, of course, scandals between their own parents.
But cinema is for that and cinema, to take into service not quite a typical story and famously beat it. The movie "The Wife" in my opinion succeeded. The mere presence of Glenn Close is pleasing to the eye. Many years of experience in cinema is evident throughout the film. I never lied, I never lied. I’ve only seen it on the screen a couple of times. And those roles are negative. But here her game pleasantly surprised me - a game distinguished by subtlety, some lightness, elegance and the very simplicity - that weighs in a stool.
"His Sparrow" Jonathan Price also gave a wonderful game - just like the actors who appeared only in tiny flashbacks.
The young actor Max Irons was also pleased. For the role of the son of the main characters, it would be difficult to find a better candidate. From the first frames, his look, his look give an accurate definition of the character and his position.
I would like to note the musical range – such an unusually unobtrusive, and sometimes even unexpressive, but it is such music that lightly emphasized the anxiety of the moments.
The movie drags the game. The film is devoid of special effects with their coolness. The film without marvelous landscapes and even interesting color solutions. Only the cold color of the actress’s eyes, in which, oddly enough, such warmth lurked – just like in the final shots with a flight over the sunlit clouds.
10 out of 10
Woman, wife, you are so alone.
Like the moon in the sky,
It's like the moon in the sky.
And without you, I don't need life.
Wife, wife, only you in my heart spring.
Semen Slepakov 'Wife, wife, you are so alone'.
Writer's bread, in which ' one tip, the other roots'. But there are those who disagree with this approach. How long, they shout, will we endure? Spare us that - and that's exactly what ' Wife' Björn Runge.
This movie is weird. Strange in contrast. Emotional, sensual, animate characters in the design of the creative genius - those that prompted the Nobel Committee to pay attention to John Castelman. And suddenly, clamped, complexed, flawed ' alma mater' all these children. How did she and #39; give birth & #39;? In tears and pain? Or maybe in the masochism of moans the soul found true inspiration? Feeding on it? Was she a stepdaughter in her home? Or offended Cinderella? No, I think so. So what made you grit your teeth silent? Is this an insidious 'Bluebeard' of our time put the seal of silence on Joan's mouth? And piece by piece, page by page, littered with inflamed consciousness paper in the unselfishness of service. So, the first thing that caused the question is the contrast of the sites - dry boredom in personal life and emotional storms in book offspring.
Next. A woman who had enough strength, intelligence, perseverance to rob a rival and take her husband, the father of a small child, out of the family, appears obedient ' Silent' Is it possible that the only thing left was a one-off deception? And then? Insight and repentance? Or did you get stuck while you were trying to get your boyfriend? And the passion for life dried up? We see neither the joy of life, but the timidity of existence. She immersed herself daily in eight-hour slavery - judging by the cadres of her confession, and in this folly, she arrived year after year. Weird. But it's weird. Here is the second reason for your skepticism.
The acting in the picture is of excellent quality. I have to give Glenn Close and Jonathan Price credit. Their pair are pulling the whole ribbon. Christian Slater is an addition to this performing duo. Everyone else is just everything else. But this is where, in my opinion, this very time bomb is hidden. How? Who, you ask? Of course Glenn Close. In it, I believe, the third point of proof of the wormhole of the film. I look at her and doubt to my fingertips, I don't believe it. What you want to do to me, but I don't believe her. Powerful to become figures in appearance, the dignity of the fortress in the body, the power of the personality in the face. Emphasized by the whole nature of physics, confident, given by nature organics. What associations are born? The bravest. For example:
There are women in Russian villages
With the calm importance of persons,
With beautiful power in motion,
With a gait, with the eyes of the queens,
Will the blind not see them?
And the sight of them says:
It will pass as if the sun will shine!
See if he can get a ruble!
Beautiful, to the world of wonder,
Rouge, slim, tall,
It is beautiful in all clothes.
It's all about work.
And hunger and cold endure.
Always patient, steady. ..
I've seen her mow:
What a slap, then a slap!
In the game, the horse does not catch,
He will not be saved, he will be saved.
The horse will stop at the jump,
It will come into the burning hut!
I don't think it's an exaggeration to describe Joan as that. A manly woman. Male, if you will. In Soviet cinema it is N. Mordyukova, and R. Markova (their bright memory). And no matter what pity-robosty & #39; songs she sang & #39; our heroine, as orphaned and fearful, did not lower her eyes, so as not to say in defense of her tightness (in American society) - all this is from the evil. A monumental structure named Glenn Close towering above the world ' dwarfs' and feminin boys. This is the third 'weak link'
The plot of the picture reminded me of Guy de Maupassant and the novel “Dear Friend” & #39;. There is a lot of similarities, but in most of the face, characters, relationships are left behind the frame and only the words of memories sound reproaches of one of the parties. We understand how the audience and the associative series build themselves. Screen time does not allow you to delve into the wilds of countless adulterers, and this is not necessary - another basic idea is submitted for consideration.
John Castelman evoked pleasant associations with Woody Allen (Professor Gabriel Roth). The dragging ' tempter of the word' from ' Husbands and wives', 1992. And lovers of talent like a retinue making a king. And funny, and amusing senile lust, striving after fleeing age.
' Colette', 2018 roll call-' shootout' with ' Wife'. Take a look and find 10 differences. Or ' twin sisters' are they having fun?
4 out of 10
In modern Hollywood, to be noticed by critics, you need to choose one of the “relevant”, but already the order of worn-out topics. In a first approximation, Björn Runge’s film “The Wife” appears as one of these themes, namely gender roles, the story of a strong woman who has to sacrifice herself for the sake of the traditional way of life and social approval. However, fortunately, the picture is not quite about that.
In its spirit, “The Wife” is primarily a chamber drama, where you can not see the skillful camera work, beautiful plans or non-standard look of the director. No, everything is built exceptionally so that nothing distracts the viewer from the excellent acting of Glenn Close and Jonathan Price, who seems to be experiencing a kind of Renaissance in his career. But his work pales in comparison with the splendor and charisma of Close. The plot in this film could develop in the event that she did not say a word, so expressively and clearly express all thoughts and emotions on the face of the heroine, when the camera grabs it close-up.
Despite the fact that this picture is the Hollywood debut of Björn Runge, it is not Scandinavian cinema. There is no excessive depth and abstract concepts in it, because the plot does not surprise with its sharp turns, the types of characters are banal, and the replicas, then they do not express anything in essence, then they burst with irony and pathos. Nevertheless, in general, the script is neat, devoid of any critical shortcomings and qualitatively performs its job giving to reveal itself by acting.
So what catches the picture and what to pay attention to when viewing it. First of all, on her psychology. The inner conflict of this film is not in the oppression of the genius of a woman or in the exposure of the talentlessness of a man. It is about sacrificing for the sake of the “higher” goal, whatever it may be for each of the characters and about the subsequent meeting with the consequences of their choice. In one scene, Close's character says, "Don't make me look like a victim." I am much more difficult.” And this deal with itself makes perfect sense: for the sake of fulfilling your ambitions, for the sake of love, for the desire to write and be read. But will there come a time when there will be too much of this sacrifice and when you will want to rethink your priorities? Will the moment stop love, which caused everything and because of which nothing can end, or is it just a fear of losing what you already have? Everyone will draw this conclusion for themselves, and the film will only suggest a question that needs an answer.
When our lecturer in age psychology asked us to give a life story to illustrate the relationship model, she immediately warned: 'Not family! Family psychology is a very delicate matter. There is one textbook thicker than the collections of works of some authors'.
On the screen, a married couple of honorable age, retaining a sense of humor, able to take care of each other and their children. He is a famous writer, she is his wife, thoughtful, tactful. And until about the middle of the film, when I read the preview that she was actually writing the books, there was a growing sense of anger at the injustice. 'How is that? And where is her honor and respect?!' Logical in this sense is the reaction of his son, who learned about this theory from an obsessive biographer. However, the heroine herself reminds that she is not a victim at all.
And then my view of the situation expanded. The family is built on the couple's relationship and their pair is controversial, but they are a team. Once upon a time, the two of them were not as scared in this world as one at a time. And it was the two of them who found their way to their dream: to be a writer whose books are read. Why one writer? Because she has a talent for writing, putting life and people into words, he has a talent for inventing and living stories, fueling their future books (however we judge it). I'm not talking about social assumptions, because now only the lazy will not talk about them. But do not forget that from that moment to 99 years (the time of action) passed a decent number of years. And at the same time, in addition to the most literary work, there was a simple life, the two of them created not only many beautiful works, but also two children, and even a grandson waited. By the way, the scene of the conversation with my grandson for me was the most touching. This is common - what they did together, and there is no contradiction, there is no room for controversy.
In honor of the first publication of the book, the couple naively jump on the bed with the words: ' we will be printed ' which causes nothing but joy for them. But while celebrating the announcement of the Nobel Prize, also jumping on the bed, holding hands, he says: 'I got the Nobel' And when it sounds like this ' I', she does not want to jump, and in general it seemed to me that from this moment the process of the very banal suppression of anger, which will come out, starts. We'll find out later about his pain. A husband who receives public recognition for his wife’s work is still waiting for her personal recognition of his work for the family. His victims live out their creative incapacity every day for the sake of their family.
Well, every choice has consequences. But the good news is, we can choose every moment of time while we're alive. And we don't have to wait until someone dies to release us. She's still alive, she's got talent, and she even has blank sheets in her notebook.
The film "Woman" is an incredibly old-fashioned work, and in a good sense of the word. To some extent, the script is saturated with the smell of nostalgia for what the films used to be: a fascinating story, veteran actors, an element of mystery and, of course, human relationships at the center of the epic. And, interestingly, there seems to be nothing important or allegorical about the film: to call “Woman” an abstruse drama about how dynamically the relationship between men and women in society has developed over decades, well, somehow the language does not turn. At the same time, it is foolish to ignore the social relevance of the film, as well as to overestimate it: the reception of the “long-suffering spouse” has never been so pronounced.
The fictional story unfolds in a very real world. The central plot is so believable and so well written that it is striking how "The Wife" is not based on facts at all. In 1992, the famous writer Joe Castelman prepares to accept the Nobel Prize in literature. He and his wife celebrate in a narrow circle, but when it comes to public celebrations, Joe’s narcissistic nature is revealed. The writer pretends to be humble and never stops praising his wife, without whom he claims he would be nothing. The story seems a bit complicated from the start as Joe’s wife, Joan, hides a secret that corrodes her soul. And then the journalist got behind the couple in Stockholm, and begins to hint that he too knows the secret of the writer and his wife.
In addition to focusing on the relationship between Joe and Joan Castelman, the film also hides another aspect of family life, such as the relationship between parents and son and daughter. The Wife also explores aspects of creativity as such. The script does not say this head-on, but it interprets the material well: writing becomes one of the building blocks of the Castelman marriage. Ironically, his writing talent also affects Joe’s relationship with his son and himself with his wife in a more destructive way.
The search for truth in Wife is an exciting process. As the main character, Joan looks into the camera with a devastated look with a curved smile and points to a life full of resentment. Her character, as well as the personal story revealed in flashbacks, gives good food for reflection on the nature of love for this particular person. While the character of her on-screen spouse is mired in self-admiration and senseless spiritual eroticism, the heroine Close undergoes a quiet but powerful transformation. Watching the insights of this female character gives an unforgettable film experience.
The Wife is a project by Glenn Close from beginning to end and no other actors can rise to her level in this movie. Jonathan Price and Christian Slater are probably the only ones who can make a strong impression. The first slowly blurs the line between a good old man and a miserable scoundrel as the plot progresses, and the second is simply pleasant to see, thanks to its bright and energetic appearance.
At times, the drama in Wife is a bit uneven, but still the impression of the film is exceptionally favorable - it's all about decent acting. The characters in the script also add a sense of authentic material, which makes the characters played by Price and Close truly alive. For connoisseurs of acting skills of these artists, “The Wife” will be a real holiday. Modest, but reasonable narrative, focus on characters, etc. corresponds, of course, to the political moment in cinema (as, for example, the recent “Widows”, released with ' Wife' about the same time), but “Woman” came out more good-natured and unobtrusive: a perfect example of how accurate selection of actors, turns in spirit a modest indie film into something beautiful.
7 out of 10
Lately I don’t want to feel sorry for anyone. Yes, of course, I feel sorry for the victims of wars, abandoned children and people affected by accidental circumstances. But for the most part, in our daily lives, we are responsible for what happens. And yes, we often do things that don’t lead to our happiness and find a million reasons and excuses for our choices. And most importantly, we often know that we simply choose the lesser of a few evils. Not of two, but always of evil. Inside, we think so. We do not think in terms of the choice of two happiness, and even the word happiness is difficult to imagine in the plural. And at the end of life, we are likely to regret our choice at least several times and think: “What if...”. And happy if it only happens a few times. In this film, in my opinion, she made a good choice in favor of the man she loved, in favor of the opportunity to publish her books, rather than being abandoned on dusty shelves by misogynistic critics. Yes, she renounced authorship, but that her 'child' live the life she deserved. Of course, every person who puts his soul into his creations, craves recognition and wants to shout to the world that it was he ' gave birth ' a masterpiece. But that story was different. Yes, perhaps her books could still win the minds and hearts of critics, even with her name on the cover. But not everyone can and is willing to take risks. this is the choice and the price for it. . .
In my subjective view, the film does not carry any hidden depth. Everything is on the surface, but that’s not a bad thing. Life doesn’t always have to have some mysterious depth. The picture is billed as a drama. The tragedy of the film is that it is not there. There are lives of two people who have made a choice and lived a decent life, making every day the choice to live this way and not otherwise. But by the end of life, they were not ready to fully accept the life they chose.
7 out of 10
General impression: Easy and unhurried narration of the film with untwisted turns gives aesthetic pleasure to feel the acting. Do you want to see how one look can show the universal resentment? Well, Glenn Close makes it 100! Her eyes speak louder than words, I was amazed at how subtly and accurately the actress conveys love, resentment, hatred in one second. The actress was nominated for "Oscar" in the category - best female role. I would be very happy for her if she received the coveted statuette, as she collected other awards. I'll be rooting for her and holding my fists!
“Woman” is a small excerpt from the life story of 2 people with flashbacks, let you guess what’s what from the beginning and you will have all the cards on the table. This movie doesn't make it boring. This is a drama about how a woman for the sake of love for a man abandoned everything, leaving behind her career, forgiving her husband of infidelity. The tagline for the film is "It's never too late to find yourself," I would change to "Behind every strong man, there's a strong woman." And it is. There are many examples in history of how a woman (wise!) leads to the success of her beloved. It happened, but nature is that the man is already the winner, the main thing is not to let him doubt this and everything will be fine. This movie clearly demonstrates what a man has achieved and how much his wife loves him, ready to give him everything, as long as he was happy.
The movie resembles a performance of 2 actors, a leisurely action, locations that almost do not change, but how nice to watch two lovers who complement each other no matter what. I recommend this movie to you, but remember, this is just a drama, so do not expect something unimaginably colossal. Do not scold the main character, she made a choice, deciding for herself as best, with the pride of a wise woman.
8 out of 10
I remember Glenn Close all my life for his starring role in Dangerous Liaisons. How well she always plays complex and contradictory roles. One of her psychotic crazy in "Fatal Attraction" just worth it. Her strongest and most daring role, for me personally, is in The Mysterious Albert Nobs. For this role it is so disappointing that Glenn did not receive a deserved Oscar.
Now comes with Close a new film called “Wife”, and for this role Glenn has already received a number of prestigious awards, and now ahead of the long-awaited Oscar, and let’s hope that she finally gets this statuette for best actress.
The movie "The Wife" was very strong. Before us is a mysterious story with a double bottom, a story of true love, full of dedication, a story of loyalty and devotion, the foundations of marriage and the fact that behind every successful man there is a wise woman.
I didn't get hooked on your novel. It just doesn't catch on.
- How can you love me if you don't respect me? We need to break up.
- Don't leave me. I love you and I'll do anything! Do you want me to help you?
The story of an elderly married couple in which the husband will receive the Nobel Prize for literary achievements. He is a brilliant writer, and there will be a great celebration in his honor. All the attention of the world is focused on this event. So how did he achieve his goal? You should ask his wife. She hid the truth about her husband for many years, and we see an incredible story of family secrets and skeletons in the closet in the intellectual family of writers.
The heroes of this story are very interesting and extraordinary people. This film itself is like a good novel that catches and gives food for thought. How the main character loved her husband all her life, what sacrifices she made - this is the power of true love, this is the real wife, mother, creator, who creates happiness and family.
I really enjoyed this film and watched it twice: first one, and then shared the viewing with a loved one. Notice how Glenn Close plays, how she fills the frame. It seems as if the film itself was created only for her, so that she exquisitely and so subtly played her great role. Close is the center of the universe in this film, and it is impossible to break away from it.
Glenn’s partner in the film was Jonathan Price – a respected, British actor who has long received critical acclaim for the role of a gay man in Carrington. Modern viewers can remember him in the popular series “Game of Thrones”. Close and Price's duet turned out chic, and it was nice to see the film with their participation.
The storm of emotions and impressions after this film, and after watching it, you still think about everything analyzing what will happen next. The film is wonderful, and for viewing fans of family dramas or fans of chic acting I recommend.
"The Wife" is a 2017 drama by Swedish director Björn Runge. The movie is soulful and strong, life-affirming and mysterious. It is necessary to see with your own eyes and feel this unexpected story. Thank you for your attention, everyone is in a good mood and only the best films.
8 out of 10
Women’s abandonment of their own ambitions for the sake of family, husband, children is a very common topic worthy of special attention today. And ' Wife' tells us not about self-sacrifice for the good, but about the feeling of inferiority against the background of abandoning their aspirations. About the sadness that comes at the end of life, when you realize that your time is lost and there is no way back.
The plot 'Wives' focuses on an elderly married woman whose husband becomes a Nobel laureate in literature. And it would be nothing, but in the process of storytelling we learn more and more details of their lives, which are depressing. Joan, as it turns out, sacrificed herself for the marriage, which, in the end, brought her two children, infidelity of her husband and a sense of inferiority against him. She feels sadness and sadness because she has never fulfilled her potential. By the end of the film, she is so tired of it that she threatens her husband to reveal his terrible secret to the public, which could destroy his reputation and deprive him of the title of Nobel laureate.
At first glance, the film seems as simple as two fingers on asphalt, but in fact it becomes sensual and deep. Glenn Close masterfully played the main character of the film and gave me personally indescribable emotions of sadness and empathy for the story of a woman who made concessions and made a big mistake. When children grow up, there comes a time of their own life, which turns out to be empty, so the film tries to convey to us that despite family relationships, a woman should not forget about herself and her own dreams and aspirations.
This movie looks very easy. It has a small timekeeping, in the middle we are asked a question that makes the viewing time even shorter, because the search for the answer to the question “how was it really” absorbs all attention, from viewing it is impossible to break away. For me, “The Wife” is a high-quality dramatic film, a feature of which is the unique play of Glenn Close. This incredible actress did not just receive award after award, because she did a great job on her character.
I recommend watching it for everyone and everyone. “Woman” is definitely worthy of your attention, if you do not have in your head the idea that a woman must act as the main character did when she was still very young.
Against the background of the rejection of the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2018, this picture by Swedish director Björn Runge is very conveniently based on the story of Joe Castelman (Jonathan Price), a writer whose works were awarded the highest Nobel award.
The writer's muse - the faithful wife of Joan (Glenn Close) - is directly related to this story. She carefully monitors Joe's nutrition, appearance and health. She is aware of all his adventures and does not seem to attach the slightest importance to it. After all, geniuses have an increased libido in status. In general, she is submissive, humble and boundlessly devoted to her Joe. Until Nathaniel (Christian Slater) appears in the story, another writer trying in vain to get close enough to become Joe’s personal biographer. I must say that he has long been ' found ' for this family enough material to blow to dust the myth of the outstanding writer Joe Castelman. But the faithful wife, skillfully smoothing out sharp corners, carefully guards the honor and name of the Nobel laureate in literature. And while she does, everything that has been hidden from prying eyes and ears for years, all the secrets that she has kept behind seven seals, all this is like burning Joan from the inside and bursting out with a storm of emotions. And the fact is that she is first of all a person who, although accustomed to living someone else’s life and hiding behind someone else’s name, has not ceased to possess his own feelings. She's also a woman who was once given the sound of a book that nobody read. A writer needs readers - that's what made Joan take a step back and stand behind Joe's back and stay there forever.
A completely calm and consistent storytelling of a few days in the life of a married couple before and after the Nobel Prize. Mostly cold shades seem to be specially used in the picture so that nothing distracts from the emotional boom that is brewing between the main characters. And also wonderful music, which very clearly and beautifully highlights all the key moments of the film.
Incredibly, Glenn Close manages to convey the emotions she experiences on the screen to the viewer in such a way that he himself begins to be angry, sad, happy, uncomfortable with Ms. Castelman. It is impossible not to fall in love with this actress. It seems that with each new film, where Close is assigned the main role, she becomes so sincere that she no longer plays, but lives. Give her an Oscar! She deserves it rightfully!
Yeah, she did it! How I rooted for Glenn Close, nominated this year for ' Golden Globe' for Best Actress, you can’t tell. Ask him why he's so excited. To be honest, Glenn has been my favorite since the days 'Fatal Attraction'. There were also 'Dangerous Liaisons' and '101 Dalmatians' which only added to the conviction of the undoubted talent of this Connecticut native. But, unfortunately, she does not often delight us with her work on the movie screen, as I would like! Moreover, her participation in the Swedish-British-American project 'The Wife' was a real success for me as a moviegoer. I think it's for Glenn, too.
Such a rich material: the drama of a single married couple who have lived together for more than a dozen years, and united by one not very beautiful secret; the main role in the film is already far from a young woman forced to sacrifice herself to her husband, simply because he is a man. Yes, it's a beautiful cut for such an actor's diamond, which for me personally is Glenn Close. And as they say, she didn't pump. Her performance in the film is enchanting, I am not afraid of that word. I will not go into all the details and nuances of her performance of this role. To give just one example, I sat fascinated during the stage at the Nobel laureate dinner. The actress gave out the strongest excitement of her heroine, a mixture of disappointment, fear, bitterness, love, literally with one eye. That was amazing! I believed her unconditionally. You take her pain as your own.
To dedicate yourself, your life, your talent, your work to a man who is forced to rest on his laurels as the great writer of our time instead of you, it is worth a lot. It's worth your whole life. And so Joan can't get over it, she can't stay any longer at this dinner. And she runs, overturning trays at the waiters, so as not to see and hear how her husband swears from the stage in eternal love. In general, Glenn Close in the role ' gray cardinal' her wife literally made this year all the nominees of the award ' Golden Globe', from Lady Gaga to Nicole Kidman. The picture ' Wife' became a real benefit for the actress.
Jonathan Price as Joan Joseph Castelman's husband is organic, believable. You believe him, too, but you breathe calmly. Well done work, nothing more. The other actors are as good as Price.
However, I want to highlight the game ' Young Joan and Joseph', whose roles were performed by Annie Stark and Harry Lloyd, respectively. And looking at Annie, I couldn't get rid of déjà vu. A young actress very similar to Glenn Close was found by directors, I was surprised. How so? It was nothing surprising. Annie Stark is the daughter of Glenn Close. Of course, compared to her mother, she's a bit shackled in her game, but she's just as beautiful and sweet as Glenn can be. Lloyd, on the other hand, played the role of a young, untalented writer forced to acknowledge his wife’s supremacy over himself. He is natural, emotional, at some points becomes very pathetic. You think, well, why would you want to write when you're zero at it? But no, the hero is driven by ambitions to become a great author, and a successful marriage with Joan helps to fulfill them.
If we talk about the whole film ' Wife', then, of course, in my opinion, this is the anthem of the triumphant feminism. Or, if we don’t move away from radical views on gender equality in the most negative sense of the word, reminding the entire audience that a woman is a human being. Not in the sense that She can work on a par with Him, lifting weights and hammering piles, but in the sense that each individual has a natural gift and everyone should have an equal opportunity to express this gift in varying degrees, regardless of any social or gender attitudes. Which, in fact, proves the film ' Wife'.
10 out of 10
For the acuteness of the problem raised and the excellent execution of the main idea. And also for the game Glenn Close, which won the same ' Golden Globe' for playing the main role in a feature film (before that she had ' globes' for roles in TV series). I will hold my fists for her to win this year'Oscar' in the same nomination!
The film definitely deserves attention! It's clearly not about self-sacrifice.
Sometimes, after viewing, there is an impression that something is missed, maybe gestures, maybe glances or other details, of which everything would become clear. There is something else, not emotions, but the thoughts of the heroes are missed. I felt a sense of deception. Still so simple, albeit beautiful, but banal. Is that true?
The main character criticizing the book of his son focuses on the literary cliché, about the situation when the husband leads a double life, and the wife endures everything with her head bowed. That it is boring, we need to move away from this, it is fed up with a well-fed audience of readers. At first glance, I’m a family of characters just like that, a husband, if not a despot, then certainly a manipulator, bathing in the rays of glory shining from the work of his wife, day and night leaning over writing books. The decline of creativity is crippled by the award, and even what – the writer becomes a Nobel Prize winner. Undoubtedly, both spouses are talented, all their lives they breathe the same air, forgiving much they love in spite of, and is it love?
We see a clear picture of how the wife put her life to the glory of her husband, how she supports him, protects him, takes care of his health, rejoices for him, perhaps, before that call from Stockholm, it was too much for her. They are united by a family, a grandson’s children, against this background his affairs seem absurd, they are so friendly and can overcome everything, and the heroine, well, just the limit of the dream of a woman. The hero is incredibly grateful to her, telling everyone about a beautiful wife, about a life partner, without whom there would be nothing. Others see her as the muse of the writer, the hero himself thinks that he pays tribute to his wife for her labors, but what does the heroine herself feel? The expression of her feelings becomes visible only at the ceremony itself and in their latest scandal, with a vivid episode of a medal thrown from a car window. And it seems that everything is simple again, it seems that it played out a sense of injustice, a sense of underestimation, but here the dying hero gives the whole essence, opening an unpleasant picture. ..
- Tell me, do you love me?
- Of course I do.
- You're lying right now.
Beautiful and the last scene on the plane, when the heroine took on a new novel.
The film is interesting because it does not idealize anyone, except that their strange relationship, spouses perfectly complement each other in my opinion.
8 out of 10
A strong woman next to a weak man will clearly lead to trouble. Let the conflict hide behind an impenetrable screen of family well-being and full prosperity. Let the woman herself not see the problem, or at least not in a hurry to show it. Oh, love! Oh, noble sacrifice! Meaningless and merciless, though who knows if you're not a talented writer in the middle of the twentieth century. It so happened that Joan as a novelist is much better than her husband, but women’s path to literature is almost ordered. Unsurprisingly, “working in the tendem” was a great option for both spouses. You should not bury your abilities in diapers and potato peels, but at the same time save the family.
It seems like a typical statement on the subject of feminism. The film is so predictable that it should be surprising. On the other hand, the story is very accurate and hits the sore spots almost unmistakably. Besides, the quiet drama about pensioners does not stir up revolutionary flames and man-hatred. The film is not about oppression, but about the classic female choice between her own ambitions and the abstract good of the family. The irrationality of the actions of the heroine is sometimes annoying, but in the end everything becomes clear as a dazzling pan. Worldly wisdom, which is reduced to constant sacrifice, becomes the main theme that overshadows the banal question of authorship. Despite the circumstances, the woman manages to control her destiny. In a very special way.
It is amazing how the main character is always in his own shadow. At first glance, this is a supporting role, but there is no doubt who exactly is at the center of the narrative. Glenn Close's often wordless play makes the film incredibly subtle and sensual. Where the plot void actually hides, acting creates a mystery. The facial expressions of the actress are invaluable, without a drop of falsehood and, perhaps, the most beautiful thing that is in this film. However, without great music and scenery, the effect would be much less. Generally does not leave the feeling of theatrical production and the corresponding isolation of the playing space. Approximately this is experienced by the main character in Stockholm at the presentation of the prestigious award. In the film, if anything happens, it is probably not accidental.
There is little innovation and a lot of platitudes. Little fun and a lot of doubt. However, a whole and very concise story about the fact that it is great that in this world still something changes. Too bad, often late, and not always for real.
The film leaves a double impression and a sense of understatement. After the final scene in the cockpit, you exhale with disappointment and think, ‘Oh, come on!’ .
The picture can not be called unequivocally feminist, although the agenda seems to have a claim. But it's not about struggle, it's about humility. About blind worship, adoration, stepping on your throat for Him - an idol, but in fact an ordinary manipulator; he who adjusts you to himself, will unfold your life as convenient to him.
The film will never pass the Behdel test. Directors and screenwriters could introduce another female character with whom the main character could interact (the ideal example is the biographer of her husband), but apparently decided that the woman in the main characters is quite brave in 2018, so dismissed this idea.
I am not a big fan of love stories and this one is no exception.
Hoped for something about the fate of a great woman, but not enough, alas.
6 out of 10
Going to the cinema, I saw the poster - film 'Woman'.
Tagline: “Behind every great man is a great woman.”
I thought, finally! The film reveals the female power, nature and the real role in a relationship with a man.
But it turned out to be a mistaken opinion.
In the film of the world of the director, the great woman is the one who throughout the film supported her “Great Husband”, but what do you think?
First, as it turned out in deception.
Giving her works for the works of her husband, she allegedly in this way showed her love and devotion to him. But if you analyze and analyze this situation from the side of values, then an extremely unpleasant picture of the relationship between the main characters is revealed. In which the husband diminishes the dignity, merit and talents of the wife.
Second, in self-deception.
It was amazing to see two grown-up and talented people showing tender feelings for each other while being in a deep state of self-deception. What can we see from the main character in the moments when he already believed that the works were created by him? And on her part, this is manifested in the agreement to enter into a false game ' laurel sweating' in front of millions of people, with the belief that this is the merits of the husband!
Third, in the absence of self-respect.
When an intrusive journalist periodically surfaces throughout the film, who obviously plays the role of “conscience” and periodically reminds the heroine that there is still a chance to choose honesty and sincerity in their manifestations. But to the last, unfortunately, she remains true to her false values. Although in the middle of the film has a chance to change the course of events and manifest itself based on truth, honesty and sincerity towards himself and people.
So I have a big question for the director!
What is the greatness of husband and wife?
I came out of the room with great indignation!
If the film was simply called "Woman", it could be condescending that it is just a vision of one of the creators. But when the slogan uses such a strong phrase “Behind every great man, there is a great woman”, it becomes scary for women and girls who can choose as an example such behavior as wives.
I’m very unhappy with the values and morals behind this film.
Of course, 'Wife' in its device, the tape is quite ordinary and conservative, made as if by academic patterns. It will not go far for everyone at its pace. Everything is ascetic and clear: it will develop according to all canonical patterns with the usual actions of typical dramas. She will not be able to surprise the viewer with a new approach to history, not to surprise the presentation or presentation of everything around. However, she, in general, everything noted earlier to do and nothing to do, because in the spirit of her typical device she is enclosed in two main characters - a famous writer who finally receives a Nobel prize for his works, and his wife, whose life is entirely devoted to the person next to him, and, of course, their story, full of complex and large moral dilemmas. Well, as is the case in some such stories of love and loyalty, somewhere near there is one big deception in which the world is immersed, and in which the characters themselves seem to begin to believe. And this world gives rise to many questions, the answers to which will be very difficult to find.
Perhaps it is obvious that first of all, starting a conversation about this film, it is necessary to note the best thing of all timekeeping. Glenn Close seems to be the cutest old lady of all, kind and responsive, which she is in the tape at the beginning. But behind this loving fidelity lies an inexhaustible storm of true experiences that were buried and hid somewhere deep for the sake of family happiness. Year after year, the heroine kept everything within herself, forgave her husband betrayal, continued to be not just a muse, but a real creator. And the glory she did not need, why she is a modest and not loving the attention of the public woman. I have a beloved husband and two wonderful children. However, the moment of grand triumph, built on deception, does not allow Joan to close his eyes to it further, gradually clarifying for her the true essence. Magnificent Close wonderfully conveys every change in the consciousness of the heroine: she takes care of her husband with kindness in her eyes, hears the news about her grandson with tears of joy, communicates with strangers with a smile, and so until at one moment joy is replaced by bitterness, until resentment occurs in a moment of pompous speech, and tears in her eyes acquire a completely different emotional shade. And the view Close that in one second of anger is replaced by love, and after resentment by fear and awareness of tragedy, completely fascinates the audience, which can no longer remain on the sidelines. Perhaps this is one of the main, if not the most important, features of the tape: with such a straightforward honest approach, the same honest emotions are necessary on each close-up, thanks to which the truth in the tape will be perceived much more acutely. And, probably, it is worth noting that Jonathan Price also performs his work in the person of his husband at a decent level, but just his importance is lost under the power of the magnificent Close, which, as if repeating the path of the heroine, keeps on her shoulders all the success of the audience’s perception thanks to sincere and honest play, which will be simply impossible not to praise.
'The Wife' despite its conservative way of life, the story is far from being so conservative in essence: it is a very true story on the one hand, and a very complex one on the other about the role of women in the family. And the literary canvas is not so important here. The story of Joan, who sacrificed herself to her husband, children and simple family happiness, hiding behind all this her personal career and abandoning another path, can be safely transferred to modern realities, where such, despite the current changes in society, exactly exists nearby. However, Runge does not take a clear position regarding his heroine, leaving her life and all the choices made to the person in front of the screen to think about. Sacrificing herself, Joan remains a happy woman who raised two children. With all her heart she loves her husband, so much so that she forgives all sins and for the sake of eternity with him gave up her own dreams and her own self. However, like the audience, she wonders what such happiness is worth. When a husband who loves her in his own way, but not in the same way as her, continues to disappoint her again, but seems to thank her with sincere honesty for everything. But what is this gratitude worth, if behind it there is only vanity, fear and uncertainty? When it remains only to transfer everything that smokes inside to the pages of the book and continue because of bloody love, sincerely rejoice in success under a strange, but such a close name. What is this joy worth if it is followed by disappointment? And one question replaces another, but the reason for everything remains the same - the same love that made it happen and keeps it from ending. Was it all worth it because of this crazy feeling, or was it really just a blind eye to the real essence of a lost life? There are many questions, but the answer will be found later.
'The wife' perhaps came out at the right time to be seen and praised on the case and overmeasure. But it is only clear that the tape of the name of the brilliant Close is quite far from Hollywood trends, and from that it is not pretentious to boast, but peacefully and quietly exists in its European cinema. After all, this story is not about feminism, which can be discussed as the main one, but, first of all, about the person and her may not be the most correct or vice versa elections. In the same conservative spirit, she speaks calmly and smoothly, not rocking at all, but only forcing her to watch enthusiastically when the wick burns out and the world begins to change. Largely thanks to the game of a wonderful, waiting for a golden statuette Close, of course. 'Wife' existing in the spirit of his time, it does not belong to him at all, since it allows you to spread the motive both to different epochs and to completely different places of action. But, more importantly, it leads to completely different thoughts. Sacrifice in the name of love, selfishness and openness, fear of the future and the duality of desires - everything is here and everything makes you think, but perhaps the most important thing is that you value with all your heart the one who can make a king of you, even if only for her, and not the whole planet, because such a muse clearly deserves sincere honor and great love.
What a woman does not sacrifice if she loves. However, did Joan really become a victim, as many moviegoers often point out?
Of course, the main character is a brilliant personality with a brilliant writer’s gift. But the world she lives in remains true to the belief that women only belong in the kitchen and next to children. In a society where women not only don’t appreciate their talent, but don’t want to see it, Joan has a chance to express herself. So why wouldn't she use it? She does not want her works to be dusted on bookshelves that have not been read by anyone, but she can not write either.
Joe is a good writer, a respected professor at the university, but compared to Joan, he is only a small star in the background of the sun. Heroes love each other sincerely, although their relationship is not perfect. They may have been able to save their marriage because they complemented each other. Heroes can not independently realize their dreams, but with the help of each other fill this gap of dissatisfaction. Joe bathes in fame while Joan creates his literary masterpieces. Even her husband’s infidelities give the main character material for her books.
One might wonder why Joan tries to suppress the sadness that engulfed her throughout the film, and in the finale breaks down and threatens to file for divorce. And the thing is that receiving awards, it turns out, is honorable and pleasant. When her talent is elevated to world height, she no longer wants to remain in the shadows, she wants to receive an award for all her hard life, for every hard-won book; to receive public recognition and stand on an equal footing with men. There is no feminism or struggle for rights: it is simply adapting to the existing reality. The film shows a lady who tried to achieve a deserved place in society, but this is far from Joan.
The picture is not so superficial as to see only the oppressed and oppressed. And every hero turns to us now the good, then the bad side, deprives us of the opportunity to judge unequivocally. The husband cheats, but with what kind of warmth and care he treats his other half. Joan creates great works, but at the same time almost does not engage in the education of his son. Which one is better is hard to say. It was very interesting to watch the relationship of this couple, who managed to keep warmth after so many years of marriage. Each of them is old, but both are young.
The only drawback of the film is its plot, which rhymes easily with the plot of the French comedy He and She. Because of this, the outcome of the drama becomes predictable and expected. However, more important in the film is not the plot, but the inner world of the characters, which until the end remains unsolved. After all, what does the white sheet in her notebook mean for Joan: a chance for a new life or the end of a creative career?
8 out of 10
