For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!
I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.
Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.
It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.
I normally wince when I see writer/director. Not so much a wince with this one but you can see the cracks. The trouble with writer/directors is that they often get too attached to their own writing brilliance without realising that it can be self-indulgent and un-needed fluff. At over 2 hours, this, alas, has more than it's fair share.Having said that, it's not at all a bad movie. It's interesting, intriguing and suspenseful although the 'surprise' ending is anything but (assuming you stayed with the previous 1 hour 59 minutes).It's very much like a Famous Five (or Secret Seven) and jolly hockey sticks with an underlying level of mystery and menace and just a smidgen of adult gruesomeness.The acting is excellent, the scenery is superb and the story is really good (if terribly overwritten). So if you like or hanker after the glamour of the 40s with a touch of thrill, do watch it but grab a few beers to help you through the drawn-out bits.
I have a Bachelor of Science in film, but more than that I love good movies. This however is not one of them. Absolutely awful, and in so many ways. Why any of the actors featured in this film would participate in such a badly written piece of absurdity is beyond me. It is not worth your time. Period. Based on the trailer, I expected a film that dealt in a realistic way with the evolving conflicts that might impact a British aristocratic family during this period of history. Instead what I saw was a film dealing in Fellini type absurdities and characters who behaved like zombies in one surreal scenario after another. It is unrealistic, difficult to follow and boring. Save your time, and watch another film. Any other film.
delicate theme. good performances. an interesting manner to use the tension. and British atmosphere. not real convincing in few details, too slowly at the first sigh, with crumbs from Hitchcock wise used, it is a beautiful film. maybe, not a masterpiece but fascinating for the mixture of war, life of a family from high society and the fall of basic image. a film about duty. in different forms. splendid work by Bill Nighy. good job by Romola Garai who preserves the measure. and ideal spice - the presence of Julie Christie. a film who seduces. beautiful, powerful, not perfect but interesting space for a smart script. and that could be the best virtue.
I first came across the captivating young British actress Romola Garai in the 2004 movie "Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights". Since then, most of her work has been for television, but she was back on the large screen in the 2009 film "Glorious 39". The '39' refers to 1939 when Britain was on the edge of war with Germany. 'Glorious' relates to both the nature of that year's summer and the affectionate name for Garai's character Anne, the adopted daughter of the aristocratic Keyes family which is headed by an influential Conservative Member of Parliament who is appalled by the notion of the country going to war for the second time in only a couple of decades.Written and directed by Stephen Poliakoff as a kind of Hitchcockian thriller, this is a work replete with well-known British character actors spanning the age range from Christopher Lee & Julie Christie through Bill Nighy & Jeremy Northam to David Tennant & Eddie Redmayne. With so much talent available, one has a right to expect more than is actually delivered. The plotting is rather silly and often slow and the characterisation somewhat stilted, while the ending is most unsatisfactory. The locations - mostly in Norfolk - are fine though.