WasAnnon Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Pluskylang Great Film overall

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

andrew_james10 A very well written and acted movie telling a very harrowing story about what happened to Jews during World War II and the aftermath. I am of an age now where I seek knowledge of what actually happened during recent history and this story combines the facts with personal anguish. I strongly recommend those who want to watch and learn see this movie

Chris L The narration alternates between scenes from the past and from the present, and one can't say this choice turned out to be quite pertinent because if/while the passages revolving around Sarah are relatively interesting, especially the beginning and the rafle du Vel d'Hiv in fact, Kristin Scott Thomas' investigation isn't at all, which induces an extremely bad dynamic because every scene somewhat interesting is followed by a rather boring one.Anyway, the scenario as a whole isn't refined at all and a clear superficiality emerges from the movie, which doesn't convince at all. Even the actors' performances are bland, unimpressive, like the story. Elle s'appelait Sarah won't go down in the records, especially since the holocaust has been the subject of other better productions.

ray-cann I finally saw Sarah's Key and I will say that its an excellent film. Kristin Scott Thomas was great as usual, but the real star was Melusine Mayance who played the young Sarah. She was phenomenal and an actress to keep an eye on in the future. I haven't read the novel by Tatiana de Rosnay, but it's possible the film could have taken several different directions. The time shifts between 1942 and 2009 did not bother me, but I preferred the scenes with Mayance over the scenes with Thomas. Others have commented that the shifts between the two stories was necessary to avoid having another typical "Holocaust" film, but if Mayance carried the film herself from 1942 onwards, it would have been fine with me. I liked how the film portrayed a France that we do not get to see often--their experiences during the Holocaust, Vichy, etc. Yes, there are clichés, but sometimes they cannot be avoided. Hey, it's film-making after all! Overall, I give high praise for this film. It's unfortunate that Thomas and Mayance did not receive Oscar nominations for these role (but is anyone really surprised?!) but they will go far and continue to impress us

canadianguy62 The movie fairly true to the book in that the telling of the story was done with flash-backs and flash-forwards and things pretty well followed the same plot. However, where the book was a compelling read, the movie was far less so.I hate to be picky, but I have to say that the single most frustrating thing about the movie was the very poor quality of the subtitles. Since this movie starred an Anglo actress (Kristin Scott Thomas) and some of the dialogue was in English, the subtitles should have been decent ... unfortunately no.Here are a few examples."That's what I said yesterday al Normally he should be." (Huh? al? and why is normally capitalized? and exactly what the hell are you trying to say?)."You never reacts, Julia. I have three ties left a message" I think what is meant here is, "You never answer, Julia. I have left three messages."And another, "Bertrand I have spoken. He said you write an article about ..." How about, "Bertrand and I have spoken. He said you are writing (or you wrote) and article about ..."It was very distracting having to read these dreadful translations and it took a lot away from the movie. Surely, they could have asked Kristin Scott Thomas - or anyone else with basic English skills - to give them a once over and make them readable. It's mind-blowing how awful they were (and the examples I gave were all from about one five- minute stretch in the movie ... there are dozens more just like them).