l_rawjalaurence The production values on this TV movie are impeccable; expensively mounted sets, well-crafted costumes, and a clever use of technology that integrates the modern-day actors into archive film. This latter technique is especially good when it comes to showing Hemingway (Clive Owen) and Gellhorn (Nicole Kidman) and their involvement in the Spanish Civil War, and on their return to late Thirties New York. The main problem with Philip Kaufman's film, however, is the plot, which does not have much to say about the two protagonists, other than the fact that Hemingway's capacity to love women was often severely affected by his obsessive masculinity. The desire to prove himself triumphed over everything; it invaded every aspect of life, rendering him quite an unpleasant, if successful person. Gellhorn comes across as a feisty person, but we wonder precisely why she remains so attracted to Hemingway. Partly the fault lies in Clive Owen's performance; at no point does he come across as someone blessed with extraordinary creative talents. On the contrary he seems petty-minded, almost babyish. Nicole Kidman does what she can with a thankless role, but her performance remains studiously one-note. The film is at least an hour too long; it simply makes its central point about Hemingway's behavioral shortcomings over and over again. Definitely one to watch only once.

cameron-johnson4 Hemingway and gall horn tried to force the story and structure of the movie down your throat. its starts with gall horn ( Nicole kid man) getting interviewed, talking about the good Ole days, before she met gall horn, it goes back and you know because it instantly changes to black and white, and Hemingway (clive Owen) is fishing. the director wanted us to know that Hemingway wasn't a sophisticated writer, but a manly, tough brute with a writing talent. he forced us to acknowledge that by showing Hemingway, with a big cigar hanging out of his mouth, talking manly, using his Strong to reel in a big fish to the when the fish is aboard punches it in the head till it starts bleeding, to exaggerate the blood the blood is red although everything else is black and white. Hemingway has fish and animal trophy's from hunting and fishing all around his pub, gall horn comes in, they meet and a day later they are both off to Spain to fight in the war? and it wasn't like it was love at first sight gall horn admitted in the movie there was a moment she knew she was in love but that was at least 50 minutes more into the film. yes gall horn was a writer and in movies that usually means spontaneous, but that was her character and again thought was forced down our throats. prior to watching the movie, after you've looked at the movie length, then start the film then it is evident that the director is going for a movie in the style of once upon a time in America, or Gandhi, but this movie would never amount to those films although thats what was gone for. the first half of the movie is quite enjoyable and entertaining, like a TV show it is driven by tension of love and usually in a TV show when the love tension has been satisfied by sex or even the fact of the viewer knowing they are a couple, the show spirals into a conclusion.in Hemingway and gall horn once the love tension is satisfied the stupid movie doesn't go anywhere. the impact of the demise of the love (marriage) is forced down out throat (although that is predictable from the start)with quotes from gellhorn such as " life shouldn't be so perfect" and a lot others similar. as a TV show this would be great, a season of love tension, then another, then sex,marriage and true love in the second last episode of season 3, and everything in the movie that half of it was based on, that goes nowhere, somehow make it exciting and make it the final episode. this movie is OK i guess, but very very very poorly structured.

justmy2cents "I will not be a footnote to someone else's life," says Martha Gellhorn to the camera in her face. Sadly, because of the mess of the script, no POV in the plot and scenes that go nowhere, Gellhorn actually does become a footnote to Hemmingway. I know less about her now after suffering through 2 1/2 hours than I did before. This was a Netflix waste of my time.Martha Gellhorn is an old woman recalling her life. But the film begins with how she met Hemmingway. What did she do prior to meeting Hemmingway? Her story then ends with their divorce. The rest of her life and his a brief wrap up. Well, if you don't want her to be defined by her relationship with him, why start and end with Hemmingway? And oh dear they spend way too much time drinking, smoking, dancing, partying and having sex in the Spanish Civil War. I agree with another reviewer who mocked their first sex scene while the hotel room is falling down around them during a bombing! Good grief, with her legs up in the air over his shoulders, ugh, nothing romantic or passionate about that scene at all!!! I thought the entire film was going to play out over the civil war it dragged on so long. Seemed like it would never end. Characters popped up and disappeared with no explanation.Meanwhile it's one mind-numbing war is hell scene after another,("If it's Tuesday this must be Belgium?"), with no time in between to breathe and rest and know about their lives. I get it, they were war correspondents. But what else did they do with their lives? Their life together? If they didn't mention Hemmingway's famous novels you'd never know what he wrote during their brief time together. Ultimately I didn't care about either of these people. The performances were really hard to take. You could see them acting not living these characters. However, considering the dialog they had, well, what else could they do? When Gellhorn first meets Hemmingway in that bar, Clive, trying to be tough guy charming, nearly began to sound like Bogart! Ugh. This one just got away from everyone. I don't know whose fault it was, the writers, the director (oh those auteur changes!?)or the producers, but I think it's safe to say there's plenty of blame to spread around.Two thumbs down as Ebert and Roper would say.

bruenho cannot begin to understand how this expensive never ending film succeeds in gathering layers after layers of clichés, poor one liners, overacted scenes, and pointless attempts at recreating moments in history ; what Nicole Kidman, tartily dressed in various attires to make one believe she portrays a reporter, possibly achieve is giving close to nil a performance compared to Clive Owen complete tourist approach in his Hemingway role. It took me a while to figure out why I stayed with it, hoping for a redeeming scene, or some sort of irony to put it all in perspective, but i was almost relieved by the end, seeing the aged journalist picking up her same old gear tottering away from her desk. The award for the worst scene being the sex scene happening in a room at the Florida hotel in Madrid, where Gellhorn and Hemingway roll in a cloud of dust and go cuddly after being blasted to ecstasy...