Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Executscan Expected more

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

moonspinner55 Glossy, yet ham-fisted star-vehicle for Julia Roberts, unconvincing as a California Bohemian teacher who transplants herself at all-girl Wellesley College for the Fall semester in 1953. Once there--despite "single-mindedly" campaigning for Wellesley to hire her--Roberts finds she's a fish-out-of-water: the students are textbook-fed little prigs and the faculty is made up of gossips, boors and a male teacher who apparently sleeps with his students...and pretty soon, our plucky heroine is crying on the phone. When Roberts gives her introductory speech to her art students, they verbally one-up her with their too-quick, too-clever answers (one young woman, complete with heavy lipstick and rogue like a femme fatale, gleams with mean-spirited delight when Roberts appears flustered). So of course, she has to catch them off-guard with non-textbook examples of what art may be and what art could be. This formula plot-line, as old as the Hollywood Hills, seems to get resurrected in some form or another every few years at the movies--and always with a major star in the leading role. There's something about the chance to stand in front of a disrespecting class and face down inner-demons in order to win the students over that appeals to actors. They may be working out personal demons of their own, but are audiences ever as enlightened as the students appear to be on-screen? *1/2 from ****

Stephen Bird Going into it I had nothing but a sceptical mind, what to expect and the quality the film would be I had no clue, but I thought, Julia Roberts, a film about Wellesley college, surely it would fall flat? But it didn't, upon viewing I came to realise that Mona Lisa Smile was a pretty decent film truth be told. Katherine Watson (Julia Roberts) was ahead of her time, a stone cold feminist who wholeheartedly disagreed with the principals and conservative, old fashioned ways Wellesley instilled into its students. They ran classes in grooming and table setting for heavens sake, Katherine thought Wellesley was a progressive, forward thinking college, well she was very wrong. Teaching art history to a class of "brainwashed" girls (brainwashed as in Wellesley had already tapped into their fragile minds), Katherine comes to understand that the girls, lead by Betty (Kirsten Dunst), cannot express themselves and can only read and memorise from a syllabus.She spends great lengths of time trying to turn the girls around, making them realise that there's more to life than being a housewife, marrying a successful suitor and raising a family, she even encourages young Joan (Julia Stiles) to go to law school, which sadly ends in failure. It struck me as odd how Katherine could portray a further 50 years of feminism and progression when the next 50 years haven't happened yet in the film (it's set in 1953-54), did Katherine know something, was she a psychic that could see into the future? Most certainly a feminist film aimed at an audience who wanted to see what feminism was like before it actually became a thing, and how one maverick woman took things into her own hands to stand up for what she believed in. Dominic West's "Bill" and the relationship with Katherine acted primarily as a side story to give further weight to the Katherine character, both Roberts and West acted brilliantly in these scenes and it was the acting prioress particularly from Roberts that kept Mona Lisa Smile ticking at a steady pace. Yes low expectations going in, but pleasantly surprised after coming out, I obviously felt like one of the Wellesley girls in the film. Definitely worth a look, there's a load of worse things you could watch.

SnoopyStyle It's 1953, Katherine Watson (Julia Roberts) is a California girl hired as an Art History teacher at the conservative all girls Wellesley College. The students are all from upper crust families, top academically, and aiming to get marry.There are top talented actors in this movie. The girls are Kirsten Dunst, Julia Stiles, Maggie Gyllenhaal, and Ginnifer Goodwin. That's some acting power. The oddest thing acting wise has to be the subdue performance of Julia Roberts. She starts off timidly which just doesn't fit her persona. Her energy is literally vibrating as she tries to squash it down. Instead of a slice of life, it feels more like a magazine article about a slice of life.Without more realism or more tension, the story just doesn't have the zip. One problem may be the fact that everything is about marriage. It is the era of the movie, but just superficially old fashion. Maybe director Mike Newell should emphasize more the pressure of the day. Instead he assumes the audience feels this automatically. He definitely needs to build up the tension. He needs more scenes like the one with Kirsten Dunst and her mother.

Desertman84 Mona Lisa Smile is a romantic drama starring Julia Roberts together with Kirsten Dunst, Maggie Gyllenhaal, and Julia Stiles. The title is a reference to the Mona Lisa, the famous painting by Leonardo da Vinci, and the song of the same name, originally performed by Nat King Cole, which was covered by Seal for the movie.It was written by Lawrence Konner and Mark Rosenthal; and directed by Mike Newell.Set in 1953,it tells the story of Katherine Watson, a new young art history professor at Wellesley College, an all-female campus with a prestigious reputation for academic excellence. Unfortunately for free- minded Berkeley grad Watson, her East Coast teaching stint comes during a less-progressive time that finds most of her students.Among them Betty Warren, Joan Brandwyn, and Giselle Levy.They are more interested in nabbing a good husband than achieving scholastic and intellectual growth. Watson challenges her students and the Wellesley faculty to think outside of the current mores of the community and redefine what it means to be a success.Meanwhile, she tries to come to terms with her own heart's desires.Co-stars Kirsten Dunst, Julia Stiles and Maggie Gyllenhaal furnish well- observed performances that frequently outshine Julia Roberts's reflex characterization in this female variant of Dead Poets Society.But overall,the acting is just as fine.Also,the film is observed to be somewhat formulaic instead of being a fascinating exploration of a much more constrained time in our social history especially with the female teacher trying to dream a slightly bigger dream than his parents thought he or she was capable of achieving.It would have worked at all levels particularly costumes,set design, manners and acting if only it wasn't predictable.