Red_Identity This film is the type of period romance film I dislike. It's all so sad and emotional, with the loud overbearing score intended to make you truly feel. It's all obnoxious. The performance are good enough, but none of them resonate that strongly because of the very pat direction and the incredibly vapid writing. It's all so clichéd, it's the reason these sort of films don't age very well and the reason why many (like me) don't look forward to them. I'm surprised Moore got a nomination for this, she's just not up to par for the Oscars. Easily her weakest nomination. I can't say I recommend this at all, it's just not up to very high standards and not very entertaining.

ShijoDxb I never thought the movie would turn out so well.I loved the acting of Juliane Moore and the simple fact that at the end of the movie you are left with a cherished memory of a movie.The way the story is plotted is also amazing. The story kind of unfolds from an ending - kind of keeping with the title.I loved the fact that the movie doesn't end cheesy.The chemistry between the lovers portrayed is absolutely amazing in that you take over the characters and experience their heated romance.Each character is well portrayed and the same for a solid purpose contributing to the story.Its a good inspiration for all who stand for what they believe in and exemplifies it correctly.

anduarto A surprisingly weak adaptation of fairly strong novel Graham Green. Much of the strength of Green's novel lay in its unsentimental, almost stark prose. This movie, on the other hand, is all violins and histrionic embellishment. (The lovemaking scenes border on the comic by the third or fourth round). I guess the clipped, wooden dialog is supposed to reflect Green's austere style. Unfortunately the film misses the mark on both points.The cast is good with the usual cinematic liberties - Henry (Stephen Rea) is supposed to be somewhat corpulent. Julianne Moore seems like an odd choice for the captivating Sarah, but she does her best. Ralph Fiennes is a good choice for Bendix and Ian Hart almost singe- handedly saves the movie. Almost. Unfortunately, a major character who provides significant influence on the plot is completely absent from the film. As a result, Sarah's path and the eventual outcome stray a fair bit from the novel's intent. I like character driven movies as much or more than the next guy, but this one doesn't seem to have much gas. Please don't judge the novel based on this filmNote: I always check the spoiler box because I'm never sure when discussion of plot is considered "spoiling". Seems to me it's difficult to have a worthwhile discussion of a film without touching on plot at least a little.

vangogh228 The obvious lack of insight shown by some of the commenters is more than merely shocking. There are so many layers, Gordian-knot twists and intricate dialog in this film that, I guess, there are many who simply don't understand the subtleties contained within it. But, then, what can one expect from those who misquote dialog and level their expectations based on their own ego, in believing that displaying unimpressibility is a sign of intelligence?One scene in particular explains it all... in which Bendrix runs limpingly, desperately, across the common in a vain attempt to catch Sara as she is driven away, sobbing uncontrollably, in a cab. When he finally does reach her, in the church, her resignation to him and his melancholy in recognizing her reason it is far too wonderful and moving to explain.Much of the dialog should keep one up at night to ponder the nature of our own existence... "Strange how much dignity there can be in a hat." But, I am sure this is lost on those who, when they attend a movie, understand only one-punch knockouts and shots to the groin as expressions of emotion.