Paulo Corceiro Still can not believe I managed to see this movie without falling asleep. I think it was because it contained some traditional Portuguese music, which gives it an exotic and unusual touch. At the beginning of the movie I thought that Laurie Anderson would have anything to do with it, the music of Mark De Gli Antoni and some of the text recalls her albums! I noticed that the Art Direction is made by someone with a Portuguese name which may explain the presence of "fado" (the traditional Portuguese music). Julianne Moore and Matthew Broderick give their best in these crazy, unusual and pointless roles in a movie full of pointless and pretentious scenes and narrative solutions. I imagine the authors with a glass in their hands at any party full of New York intellectuals saying that the public is ignorant and does not understand a work of art like this... Who knows?

chazz46-2 As a young man, I first saw "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf?" and was aghast at such vituperative enmity shared by a married couple. As years passed, I understood that this shocking portrayal by Taylor and Burton (George & Martha) of a dysfunctional couple was just one way some couples manifest their undeniable love for each other. There is much drama and intentional pain to be inflicted upon each other to assuage their sado-masochistic tendencies. In the end, after bringing others down to their level of marital martial arts, they survive because they truly love each other. To outsiders, they express in in such an unpalatable way. On the other hand, "Marie & Bruce", while similar to George & Martha, with Marie's hateful and vituperative harangues (especially in public) against Bruce, who responds to her with indelicate personal thoughts about other women's tighter vaginas,etc., demonstrates a marital bond more consistent with the Generation X'ers propensity to see everything from ones own selfish and hedonistic point of view that leaves little room for even a flicker of true love within their marital foundation. Perhaps "M&B" reflects another casualty of our society as our moral-ethical boundaries have degenerated since post WWII changes in our society. This marriage is definitely worse that George and Martha's as there is no love residing anywhere behind their dysfunctional behavior. Even worse, Bruce takes the milquetoast approach as he receives his wife's spewings and calls her "darling" a million times in a demonstration of appeasement while he seeks the love he is missing from his wife through sexual fantasies with strange women and almost latent homosexual fulfillment with his lunch buddy, Frank. Marie and Bruce may represent the decline of dysfunctional marriages to an even lower point today than the Baby Boomer's era. There is no redeeming basis for this marriage to have ever occurred. The lack of intellectual capacity in M&B (as evidenced by the banal conversations at Frank's party) compared to George and Martha and friends is pertinent to today's minds as they proceed through trials and tribulations of marriage. The utter lack of any fundamental basis of love throughout M&B's marriage in today's arena may indeed reflect the lack of intellectual development, hedonism, amorality, and many other missing elements of our former culture that seems more prevalent in today's society. Marriage, even if practiced dysfunctionally, seems to be far more absurd and disgusting when there is no development of any basic love concept all while selfish,non-intellectual, mundane, banal, and all other dark forces have become so influential in shaping personality. I'll take George and Martha any day because I know they, at the very core, loved each other very deeply. Chazz

gradyharp Wallace Shawn wrote the very fine 'My Dinner with Andre', a talky but sensitive film that created a niche for conversational stories without plot. Sadly the qualities of that play to film result did not make it with his MARIE AND BRUCE. On paper it looks as though this strenuously boring film should be worth watching: Shawn's previous credentials, the direction by Tom Cairns, and the presence of Julianne Moore and Matthew Broderick together with little feature appearances by the likes of Campbell Scott and Blossom Dearie should suggest investing time in viewing. Unfortunately the film's premise is so dull that even the technique of having characters speak exactly what is in their minds mixed with dialogue seemingly more appropriate for human ears and adding dreamlike sequences including some rather randy voyeurism - stage worthy though these techniques may be - just can't make this dreary story of a day in the dissolution of a VERY bad marriage work. The only character in the film with whom the viewer can empathize is a friendly dog. Pass on this sad flop. Grady Harp

killpop I was very impressed with this movie, the acting was great,the writing was great, the sets were great. very little to say bad about this movie, which follows the end of the beginning of the end of a marriage. people say things outloud that one might say in one's head and the results are comical, insightful, and thoughtprovoking.among the dozen or so movies i saw at sundance this year, with a complete package, i put this in my top 5.