|
Showing all 5 reviews...
|
|
 |
New Brunswick is beautiful in this film, and so are the actors, all of whom do a fantastic job bringing to life roles that are by and large stock and aimless. The plot-line meanders as well and the film never seems to be able to decide what thematic or even genre it is trying to explore: irreducibility of evil à la Blue Velvet, East Cost Gothic à la the Hanging Garden, the problem with silver spoon socialists à la the career of Alexa McDonough. Frustrating to watch because it should have been so much better.
5/10
7.2.2003 -
jason,laing@ - age: 26-35
Ugh! Canadians can make gripping films, huh. Well don't kid yourself... this sorry, boring waste is no example of it. What an idiotic film, and an infuriating one precisely because it's a good example of how off the mark Canadian filmmaking needlessly and consistently is.
3/10
7.2.2003 -
hsmith444222@ - age: 26-35
I saw the movie and thought it was awesome. Thank God Canadians can make gripping films without the eye candy needed to carry American Blockbusters.
9/10
2.2.2003 -
person@ - age: 18-25
This film should be called, the bay of chain smoking retarded wh*res. It proves that all Maritime Cinema must include all seven deadly sins, and a minimun of 40 minutes of straight on foliage shots. One refrenshing insight that I had during the film was that even though the movie took place in 1970, the actual town used in the film were unchanged from their present appearance to create this illusion. If you are a fan of plot development and character work, then this film will leave you out on the highway with no thumbs. At least one of the characters was named Madonna... the film was painful, but I have lived to die another day.
1/10
2.2.2003 -
elliot_paris@ - age: 26-35
Incredibly beautiful and true to life story - I read the book first and was not disappointed by the movie. Very New Brunswick, if you are from downeast, a must see. David Adams Richards is a Canadian Charles Dickens.
8/10
1.2.2003 -
vransom@ - age: 36-49
| 
