ruveydarana I can't get over the first 40 minutes. I know we should consider movie in those years but hitting her in the face... this is unacceptable i think. But the other parts are beautiful and photography is breathtaking

susan-lin-470-899061 People do not need that much to be happy, and if you know how to love, you will be loved too. Life can be hard, life can be unfair, life can be unfortunate, maybe we all wanted too much, that is we are so hard to be satisfied. A tiny house, four walls, poorly made furniture, simple food, one bed, candle lights.... even after Maud starting selling her works and made money, they did not expanded the house or got a better car(in the film), because they were satisfied with each other and their little house. We don't need that much to be happy. Just like our fathers and mothers always say, they were much happier than us at our age. They had no internet, TVs, airplanes.... but they had much more real fun back then. It all make perfect sense now, we wanted too much and this desire grows bigger and the list of things we want is getting longer and longer, but it does not bring us the simple happiness, the fulfillment of living a life. This is a uplifting movie that make you think if Maud can make it and achieved happiness in her life, what is the reason for you to not have it?! Be a kind, humble, loving and grateful person, maybe you will find out that love is just within you and you are won't feel lonely anymore.

Reno Rangan What is this film! Totally unheard! It's here now, so I watched it like I do for any film. But was not expecting anything. That was my advantage. It's a biopic, about an artist, not a famous one like medieval European painters. But a well known in her native. So now the world to know about her through this flick. That's what I love about films. Sometimes it's not about the famous people, but somewhere in a small place who quietly succeeded that inspires millions if they learn about that. So the films and books do that job well.An Irish-Canadian co production. I think it has a real shot at the Oscars. Definitely for Sally Hawkins. In my opinion, she has already won that award, despite there are other good performances in this year. But if they snub this film, then as I consider like usual, the Oscars is pointless. Coming to the title, it should have been 'Maud'. Because nobody uses that word in the film. Anyway, 'Mudie' makes a good sound to pronounce, similar to Charlie, instead of Charles (Chaplin).For now, this is an under-noticed film. As always, one of the reasons is, it's not an American or a British film. Then not made by a commercially well known filmmaker and cast. But this film never meant for commercial gain. It just tells the truth. A true story of an artist who lived not only on the edge of the society, humanity as well. Because when I saw this film, I could not tell the tale from what period. My guess was the late 19th century, then surprised as the story progressed to learn the real timeline. That tells she lived a life of at least a century ago of her time.-xX] Some people don't like it if you are different. [Xx-Not a story of a high society woman. This kind of people can be found in every corner of the earth. They are somewhat discarded in the society for being different. But they too wants a normal life like everybody else. In such instance, this story happens. Maud is an orphan living with her aunt, after her brother ditched her. With no social skills, her future is not so bright. But it all changes one day when she decides to become a live-in maid to a grumpy fish seller.Initially, they find it not workable, then as the time goes by, they find each other. Following that, recognition of her paintings in the local community and spreading across, she sees some success in an unexpected path. But that's not the end of the tale. Seems happily ever after is so distant to them. A twist brings another unexpected derive in the narration. The heart rendering side of the story. From there how the remaining film would shape up before the conclusion were told.Seems everything was perfect for this film. Nice casting. I think that's the best thing happened for this. Both Sally and Ethan were amazing. Like Sally, Ethan too deserves an Oscars for his so perfect supporting role. As for the director, I think it will remain one of her best work, despite she could do good films like this in the future. This is one of the great films about the artists. Very inspiring, as well as a tearjerker, if you are a soft hearted.Low cost film, but well shot. I loved the locations. Then the dialogues. So simple and convincing. This is this year's 'Mr. Turner'. A must see film for grown ups. It got nominated for several categories in the Canadian top film awards and expected to win most of them. I hope in the coming days, it gets its due, I mean the wide recognition. Highly recommended by my side! One of my favourite biopics!9/10

Red_Identity I think Sally Hawkins was great in this year's The Shape of Water. I understand why she's getting attention for it and I think she would be a fine nominee. But really, there's no question in my mind that it's her performance in Maudie that is the much more impressive overall. She gives a career-best turn here, a completely internal performance that could have been all showy, broad theatrics had a lesser actress gotten the part. She's absolutely amazing and in a fair world would be getting nominated (if not winning) for this work. Ethan Hawke is also fantastic, showing that he can really shine in character parts like this.