Exquisitely acted, masterful use of wit and whimsy, a wonderful collection of stellar talent. Oh, and there are some men thrown in for those that are not sure who to follow...
I went in not knowing at all what to expect. And was pleasantly surprised. The film was funny, quirky, and excellently acted. I was happy to see the ensemble get the Critics Choice award for acting. Really well deserved. If you want conventional storytelling then, perhaps, this isn't for you. Certainly would go see it again.
A total waste of $8.50. Wanted to walk out but stayed to see if it got any better. It didn't.
Based on the queen deciding which female she liked best to give her orall sex. Totally not what my husband and I expected. Wanted to ask for our money back!! A lot of couples that were at the same showing felt the same way. Show didn't start on time.was at 5:35 pm. Did not start until 6:00pm..
Different take on a period piece that is very clever and quirky in its portrayal of women, sex, and power. Olivia Colman was brilliant!
I would rate this movie 0 stars if possible. It was the biggest waste of time - 2 hours of life that I cannot get back! Save your $$ and time and go to see something else!
Acting was good.......story was scummie , R2z. Sorry I went. Want my money back.
This is an absolutely brilliant film. It's wickedly funny and tragic and tender. I loved it.
Not a pretty, shallow Hollywood production. This is a complicated, sumptuous, rich depiction of what must have been a strange and dangerous life. The queen and her court were shown as real ugly, lustful, ambitious, back stabbing people clawing their way to the top. I can understand how some people wouldn't like it.
According to the reviews this movie seems to fall into two categories. You either love it or hate. I hated it. I would have left but needed to kill some time. I found the story line weak, and the background music annoying. Emma Stone was what prompted me to see it, and though her mastery of the English dialect was excellent and her acting skills O.K. she still didn't save a boring movie with no real direction. It may well be an accurate accounting of the English court at that time, but it wasn't entertaining. I was surprised to see it billed as a comedy as I didn't find it the least bit funny. Though Mary Queen of Scots had some inherent inaccuracies, it was a much better movie with more of a story line and some memorable acting.
Awful. Factual but no entertainment value. two hours of boredom
Absolutely amazing film, unique characters in a unique story. It does slow down slightly at the end but man does the end shot leave you hanging.
A comedy, not a drama. Humorous. I enjoyed it.
Do NOT expect period drama like The Crown, or The King's Speech. Expect Dangerous Liaisons -- scandalous sex, bitchy shade, and raw ambition. Personally, I thought this movie was EVERYTHING!
Wow! What a freaking amazing movie! If Lady Gaga gets an Oscar for that steaming pile of garbage and these ladies don't, then there is no justice in the world. I loved absolutely every thing about it. Brilliant. But if you want Hollywood blockbusters and Rom Coms, this may not be for you. Way too smart, sophisticated, and subtle for average audiences. Rachel Weisz, Olivia Colman, and Emma Stone are all superb. Easily the best director, costumes, score, cinematography, and best lead and supporting actresses of the year. Wow!
The only thing I can say positive about this movie is that it was better than Mary Queen of Scots.
Irritating and jarring music (loud repetitive beeping tones) throughout the film. Weird and unenjoyable - save your money. Costumes are good and the acting is fine, the problem is the script and the music.
No real meaning to it. Didn’t know why it was made
Total waste of time and money!!
Did not like at all. Waste of time and $. Nothing to do with history.... people were leaving during the movie.
Women behaving badly. Rich powerful women behaving as badly as rich powerful men. Very well acted, compelling until the very end. Oscar nomination for someone ... the director or the editor I hope.
Boring, lesbian Queen. Totally a waste of time/money.
I wish the trailer for the movie hadn't shown only the humorous scenes; it was misleading as to the actual content of the movie. I do believe the movie to be historically accurate, but so what? If the story isn't cohesive and doesn't keep me wanting more, I'd just as soon read a good book on the period. Still, the acting was brilliant and the costumes and sets superb. Thank goodness we've moved beyond horse-drawn carriages for travel.
Problem with this film is too many people today are not interested in truth and historic attention to this time period but various myth-making and psychological themes to take creative license to absurd levels. The most moronic reviews I have read are from people with a agenda who insist historical inaccuracies no longer matter and we have somehow evolved past taking such petty attention to the idea of truth and historic fact when they have determined these things do not actually exist. Save your money-this is anything but an accurate depiction of the 17th century as Titanic was of life in 1912.
I liked this period film and found it to get me interested in history.
Brilliant and scathing. Great performances from the three leads, all at the top of their game. Loved the final scene which shows what blind ambition will get you in the end. Fantastic!
Such a surprise. These actresses, Olivia Colman, Rachel Weisz, and Emma Stone, all deserve an award. He screenplay delightful and so original. More films should be made with strong versitle actresses. Brillante Bravo!
First, let me say this. Most of the reviews below are useless especially the ones that dismiss the film for historical inaccuracies, graphic sex scenes, or vile discourse. First of all, the director, Yorgos Lanthimos did not try to make the film an totally accurate historical film. However, most of the events and actions in this film are based on thoroughly researched documents. Were there lesbianic relationships among the three female characters? Let's put it this way. Queen Anne spent a considerable amount of private time with both of the younger women in her bed chambers and did eventually dismiss Lady Churchill ( Rachel Weisz) for her manipulative efforts to have Abigail ( Emma Stone) removed from the royal residence. This is amply documented in many historical accounts. Now, did Abigail actually poison Lady Churchill with the intent to kill her? Probably not, but the director decided to add this bit of drama to create some action and plot expanding drama. However, most of the political drama and scenes in the film are well documented in historical documents with the exception of the modern dance routine ( a la Michael Jackson ) between Lady Churchill and Masham (Joe Alwyn). The director used this scene to add unexpected and contemporary humor to the film. I'll get to the point. This film is a bawdy, rowdy and satirical take on the Royal Court and the reign of Queen Ann in the late 17th and early 18th century. While most of the historical elements are factual, this film is a trimphant example of satirical, cinematic entertainment and not a boring history lesson. If you want to read a truly well written review of this film, go read Peter Travers' review at rollingstone.com.
Plot was uneven. One did not have empathy for any character. Throwing tomatoes at a naked man was out of context. Male leads were insignificant.
Always interesting to see a movie that garners either raves or passionate dislike. I end of somewhere in the middle, because of the superb acting by Olivia Coleman. The cinematic tics bothered me (those silly wide angle shots, as if one is looking out from a convex mirror, as if to remind that viewing that they are the watchers). The odd Stepford wives costumes: shortcuts for stations in life, or laziness? The real star of the film is Hatfield House.
Disconnected superficial characters. Boring... had difficulty staying awake towards the end.
Waste money and time.
Disgusting and boring.
A wonderful film. Everything about it is superb: cinematography, script, brilliant acting. Seems that previous reviewers base their negative response on their “moral values.” I’ll bet they are quite happy to watch shows replete with gratuitous violence. Maybe those easily offended should read reviews before going to the movies.
This was a horrible waste of time.
Beautiful scenery and great acting yet very disappointed with the inaccuracies of the historical facts regarding the sexual nature of these women’s relationships. Like what?? It felt the explicit scenes were added for “entertainment “ while disregarding historical accuracies. Other than this, it’s a beautiful film visually!
A waste of time and depressing. Sick society and not suitable for Holiday season. Great acting but what a waste of talent. Especially Emma Stone!
The acting was very good regardless of the story -- Queen Anne was outstanding, the settings were terrific but the rest ... worthless. The sex scenes were mostly implied, unless I slept through those scenes.
The trailer and description suggested an historical drama. What followed in the theatre was anything but. Graphic gay sex (both varieties) and vile discourse scandalized and sullied would could have been an interesting account of rivalry in the court of Queen Anne. Instead, all three historical figures were sleazed to indulge the director's homoerotic fantasies. I would give no stars if it were possible.
I have no objection based on morality. Sometimes girls kiss girls. With the strong cast, the trailers led me to think I'd like this more than I did. ………………guru bob………………………..72/100